Petition 6380-R of Minnesota & Ontario Paper Co.

U.S. Customs Court

Petition 6380-R of Minnesota & Ontario Paper Co.

13 Cust. Ct. 322

CourtUnited States Customs Court

DecidedDecember 7, 1944

DocketNo. 49859

StatusPublished

This text of 13 Cust. Ct. 322 (Petition 6380-R of Minnesota & Ontario Paper 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 6380-R of Minnesota & Ontario Paper Co., 13 Cust. Ct. 322 (cusc 1944).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

At the trial it was established without contradiction that the importer in entering the merchandise had sought the advice of the customs officials, and entry was made at the values indicated as satisfactory to them. Subsequently it developed that an inland freight charge of 53 cents per hundred[323]*323weight should have been included as part of the value under the principle announced in United States v. Zellerbach Paper Co. (28 C. C. P. A. 303, C. A. D. 159), and consequently the appraiser increased the entered price. In view of Government counsel’s statement, and evidence establishing that in entering the merchandise the petitioner was without intention to defraud the revenue of the United States or to conceal or misrepresent the facts, the court granted the petition.

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

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

At the trial it was established without contradiction that the importer in entering the merchandise had sought the advice of the customs officials, and entry was made at the values indicated as satisfactory to them. Subsequently it developed that an inland freight charge of 53 cents per hundred[323]*323weight should have been included as part of the value under the principle announced in United States v. Zellerbach Paper Co. (28 C. C. P. A. 303, C. A. D. 159), and consequently the appraiser increased the entered price. In view of Government counsel’s statement, and evidence establishing that in entering the merchandise the petitioner was without intention to defraud the revenue of the United States or to conceal or misrepresent the facts, the court granted the petition.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

13 Cust. Ct. 322, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/petition-6380-r-of-minnesota-ontario-paper-co-cusc-1944.