Petition 6179-R of S. Hata Shoten, Ltd.

U.S. Customs Court

Petition 6179-R of S. Hata Shoten, Ltd.

10 Cust. Ct. 449

CourtUnited States Customs Court

DecidedMay 5, 1943

DocketNo. 48253

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 10 Cust. Ct. 449 (Petition 6179-R of S. Hata Shoten, Ltd.) 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

Petition 6179-R of S. Hata Shoten, Ltd., 10 Cust. Ct. 449 (cusc 1943).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Walker, J.

The record consisted of a deposition of a clerk in Honolulu employed to make entries for the American Customs Brokerage Co., who made the entry in question as agents for the petitioner. It appeared that certain new instructions had been given as to the method of making entries and that the invoice in question was one of the first ones to be executed thereafter; that certain information was buried in the description of the merchandise appearing on the invoice, and that had he noticed it he would have made the necessary increase in the entered value. The court was of the opinion that the record disclosed a clear case of inadvertence or carelessness in entering, and negatives any implication of intention to defraud the United States of any of its lawful duties. The petition was therefore granted, following United States v. Fish (268 U. S. 607). Ittmann v. United States (T. D. 49481) and Freedman v. United States (6 Cust. Ct. 354, C. D. 494) distinguished.

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

Opinion by

Walker, J.

The record consisted of a deposition of a clerk in Honolulu employed to make entries for the American Customs Brokerage Co., who made the entry in question as agents for the petitioner. It appeared that certain new instructions had been given as to the method of making entries and that the invoice in question was one of the first ones to be executed thereafter; that certain information was buried in the description of the merchandise appearing on the invoice, and that had he noticed it he would have made the necessary increase in the entered value. The court was of the opinion that the record disclosed a clear case of inadvertence or carelessness in entering, and negatives any implication of intention to defraud the United States of any of its lawful duties. The petition was therefore granted, following United States v. Fish (268 U. S. 607). Ittmann v. United States (T. D. 49481) and Freedman v. United States (6 Cust. Ct. 354, C. D. 494) distinguished.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

10 Cust. Ct. 449, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/petition-6179-r-of-s-hata-shoten-ltd-cusc-1943.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack