Quon Quon Co. v. United States

44 Cust. Ct. 308
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Quon Quon Co. v. United States. Read the opinion of the Court — 41 Cust. Ct. 178
United States Customs Court·Decided January 7, 1960·No. No. 63689; protests 272397-K, etc. (Los Angeles)·Published

Opinion

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the items marked “A” consist of kleenex box covers similar in all material respects to those the subject of Quon Quon Company v. United States (41 Cust. Ct. 178, C.D. 2038), the claim at 16% percent under the provision in paragraph 412, as modified by the Annecy Protocol to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (T.D. 52373), supplemented by Presidential proclamation (T.D. 52476), for other manufactures of wood, not specially provided for, was sustained. The items marked “B,” stipulated to consist of rattan flower cages the same as those the subject of Quon Quon Company v. United States (41 Cust. Ct. 181, C.D. 2039), were held dutiable at 45 percent under paragraph 409 of the tariff act as rattan articles.

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

Quon Quon Co. v. United States, 44 Cust. Ct. 308 (cusc 1960).

44 Cust. Ct. 308 (Quon Quon Co. v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Quon Quon Co. v. United States
41 Cust. Ct. 178 (U.S. Customs Court, 1958)
Quon Quon Co. v. United States
41 Cust. Ct. 181 (U.S. Customs Court, 1958)