Lyte v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

Lyte v. United States

21 Cust. Ct. 216, 1948 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 687

CourtUnited States Customs Court

DecidedOctober 7, 1948

DocketNo. 52602; protest 131774-K (San Francisco)

StatusPublished

This text of 21 Cust. Ct. 216 (Lyte v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Customs Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Lyte v. United States, 21 Cust. Ct. 216, 1948 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 687 (cusc 1948).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

It appeared that the goods were subject to the British purchase tax and on entry a duress certificate was filed in which the importer certified that it had entered the merchandise at a value higher than that defined in the tariff act because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases then pending on appeal for reappraisement. The collector disregarded said certificate and liquidated upon the entered value on the ground that the certificate was not signed, the signature being in typewriting. Under authority of Clinton Smullyan Associates v. United States (35 C. C. P. A. 7, C. A. D. 363) the court sustained the claim that the liquidation should have been made upon the basis of the value found by the court on appeal to reappraisement (Reap. Dec. 6478), in which it was held that the British purchase tax was no part of the entered value.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

It appeared that the goods were subject to the British purchase tax and on entry a duress certificate was filed in which the importer certified that it had entered the merchandise at a value higher than that defined in the tariff act because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases then pending on appeal for reappraisement. The collector disregarded said certificate and liquidated upon the entered value on the ground that the certificate was not signed, the signature being in typewriting. Under authority of Clinton Smullyan Associates v. United States (35 C. C. P. A. 7, C. A. D. 363) the court sustained the claim that the liquidation should have been made upon the basis of the value found by the court on appeal to reappraisement (Reap. Dec. 6478), in which it was held that the British purchase tax was no part of the entered value.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

21 Cust. Ct. 216, 1948 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 687, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lyte-v-united-states-cusc-1948.