Petition 6212-R of Galban & Co.

U.S. Customs Court

Petition 6212-R of Galban & Co.

8 Cust. Ct. 550

CourtUnited States Customs Court

DecidedJune 11, 1942

DocketNo. 47305

StatusPublished

This text of 8 Cust. Ct. 550 (Petition 6212-R of Galban & Co.) 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 6212-R of Galban & Co., 8 Cust. Ct. 550 (cusc 1942).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

It appears there was a. clerical error made by the shipper in figuring the total value of the hides in question. The broker accepted [551]*551■the incorrect total on the invoice and deducted therefrom the nondutiable charges. The appraiser because of the decrease in weight of the hides upon, the voyage advanced the unit value but the total of the invoice would not ordinarily have been advanced had it not been for a mistake in multiplication. As a matter of fact "the only advance in unit value resulted from the decrease in weight of the hides, and under customs regulations such advances are not the subject of imposition of additional duties for undervaluation. The court was of the opinion that in making the entry the petitioner did not intend to defraud the Government or to deceive the appraiser as to the value of the merchandise. The petition was therefore ■granted.

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

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

It appears there was a. clerical error made by the shipper in figuring the total value of the hides in question. The broker accepted [551]*551■the incorrect total on the invoice and deducted therefrom the nondutiable charges. The appraiser because of the decrease in weight of the hides upon, the voyage advanced the unit value but the total of the invoice would not ordinarily have been advanced had it not been for a mistake in multiplication. As a matter of fact "the only advance in unit value resulted from the decrease in weight of the hides, and under customs regulations such advances are not the subject of imposition of additional duties for undervaluation. The court was of the opinion that in making the entry the petitioner did not intend to defraud the Government or to deceive the appraiser as to the value of the merchandise. The petition was therefore ■granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

8 Cust. Ct. 550, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/petition-6212-r-of-galban-co-cusc-1942.