Petition 6393-R of Westinghouse Electric & Manufacturing Co.

U.S. Customs Court

Petition 6393-R of Westinghouse Electric & Manufacturing Co.

17 Cust. Ct. 176

CourtUnited States Customs Court

DecidedSeptember 3, 1946

DocketNo. 51284

StatusPublished

This text of 17 Cust. Ct. 176 (Petition 6393-R of Westinghouse Electric & Manufacturing 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 6393-R of Westinghouse Electric & Manufacturing Co., 17 Cust. Ct. 176 (cusc 1946).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Cole, J.

From the testimony it appeared that the articles in question were obtained as an experimental proposition to determine whether they, as regular parts of a Canadian rectifier, were also suitable for use on an American rectifier. The customs broker testified that, in entering at the invoice prices, he followed the instructions of the petitioner, and that in so doing, he supplied the customs officials with all information in his possession. The appraiser testified that there was nothing in the attitude of either the petitioner or the customs broker indicative of an attempt to deceive the customs authorities or to defraud the revenue of the United States. The petition was therefore granted.

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

Opinion by

Cole, J.

From the testimony it appeared that the articles in question were obtained as an experimental proposition to determine whether they, as regular parts of a Canadian rectifier, were also suitable for use on an American rectifier. The customs broker testified that, in entering at the invoice prices, he followed the instructions of the petitioner, and that in so doing, he supplied the customs officials with all information in his possession. The appraiser testified that there was nothing in the attitude of either the petitioner or the customs broker indicative of an attempt to deceive the customs authorities or to defraud the revenue of the United States. The petition was therefore granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

17 Cust. Ct. 176, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/petition-6393-r-of-westinghouse-electric-manufacturing-co-cusc-1946.