Mantell Export Co. v. United States

58 Cust. Ct. 662, 1967 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 2453
CourtUnited States Customs Court
DecidedApril 12, 1967
DocketR.D. 11290; Entry No. 956758, etc.
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 58 Cust. Ct. 662 (Mantell Export Co. 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
Mantell Export Co. v. United States, 58 Cust. Ct. 662, 1967 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 2453 (cusc 1967).

Opinion

Rao, Chief Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement herein involved, which have been consolidated for purposes of trial, are com cerned with the value of certain wooden coathangers exported from Yugoslavia during the months of December 1963 through February 1964 and entered at the port of New York. The issues in this case were framed by the parties in an oral stipulation which sets forth the following agreed facts:

First, that the involved merchandise consists of wooden coathangers of the wishbone type exported from Yugoslavia in December of 1963 and January and February of 1964 by the firm of Slovenijales Kooper-ativa of Ljubljana, Yugoslavia.
Second, that the merchandise was entered for consumption after the effective date of the Customs Simplification Act of 1956 published in T.D. 54165, and is not identified on the final list published by the Secretary of the Treasury pursuant thereto, T.D. 54521.
Third, that on or about the dates of exportation of the involved merchandise, the seller, Slovenijales Kooperativa, did not sell such merchandise to all purchasers for export to the United States.
Fourth, that the basis of appraisement was the export value, as defined in section 402(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended of such merchandise as that term is defined in section 402(f) (4) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended.
Fifth, that the issues herein are limited to whether the hangers identified on the invoices before the court with the suffix X were of a [664]*664different quality than those hangers not so identified, and if so, what is the correct dutiable value for such hangers so identified.

Plaintiff concedes the correctness of the appraisement on all other hangers on the invoices.

Sixth, that the principal market is at the sales office of Slovenijales Kooperativa in Ljubljana, Yugoslavia; that the usual wholesale quantity is 1,000 pieces; that the invoice unit prices include the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other expenses incidental to placing the merchandise in condition packed ready for shipment to the United States.

The pertinent data concerning the items in dispute, which were imported packed in cartons of 100 pieces, is as follows:

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

Related

Spanexico, Inc. v. United States
75 Cust. Ct. 123 (U.S. Customs Court, 1975)
Exbrook, Inc. v. United States
69 Cust. Ct. 224 (U.S. Customs Court, 1972)
Magnesium Elektron, Inc. v. United States
65 Cust. Ct. 762 (U.S. Customs Court, 1970)
Mantell Export Co. v. United States
60 Cust. Ct. 1063 (U.S. Customs Court, 1968)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
58 Cust. Ct. 662, 1967 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 2453, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mantell-export-co-v-united-states-cusc-1967.