R. J. Saunders & Co. v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

R. J. Saunders & Co. v. United States

46 Cust. Ct. 658

CourtUnited States Customs Court

DecidedApril 12, 1961

DocketReap. Dec. 9973; Entry Nos. 762986; 821112; 754686

StatusPublished

This text of 46 Cust. Ct. 658 (R. J. Saunders & Co. v. United States) 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

R. J. Saunders & Co. v. United States, 46 Cust. Ct. 658 (cusc 1961).

Pincite

Opinion

Mollison, Judge:

The merchandise the subject of the appeals for reappraisement enumerated in the attached schedule consists of wood-enware articles, imported from Japan. The merchandise was invoiced at certain unit prices which included charges for items listed on the invoices as “Inland Freight from Factory to port,” “Other Charges,” and “Buying comm, 6% on Factory.” It was entered at the invoiced unit values, less the charges for the foregoing items, and was appraised at the invoiced unit values, plus the charge for buying commission.

Counsel for both parties have filed the statements required by rule 15(d) (1), from which it appears that there is no dispute that the basis of valuation contended for by both parties is export value, as defined in section 402(b), Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, and, nothing to the contrary appearing, I find and hold that to be the correct basis of valuation for the merchandise involved.

The appeals for reappraisement have been submitted for decision upon stipulation of counsel that such value, for each item of merchandise, is the invoice unit value, net packed, less the items invoiced as inland freight from factory to port.

On the agreed facts, I find such value to be the value of the merchandise, and judgment will issue accordingly.

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

Mollison, Judge:

The merchandise the subject of the appeals for reappraisement enumerated in the attached schedule consists of wood-enware articles, imported from Japan. The merchandise was invoiced at certain unit prices which included charges for items listed on the invoices as “Inland Freight from Factory to port,” “Other Charges,” and “Buying comm, 6% on Factory.” It was entered at the invoiced unit values, less the charges for the foregoing items, and was appraised at the invoiced unit values, plus the charge for buying commission.

Counsel for both parties have filed the statements required by rule 15(d) (1), from which it appears that there is no dispute that the basis of valuation contended for by both parties is export value, as defined in section 402(b), Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, and, nothing to the contrary appearing, I find and hold that to be the correct basis of valuation for the merchandise involved.

The appeals for reappraisement have been submitted for decision upon stipulation of counsel that such value, for each item of merchandise, is the invoice unit value, net packed, less the items invoiced as inland freight from factory to port.

On the agreed facts, I find such value to be the value of the merchandise, and judgment will issue accordingly.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

46 Cust. Ct. 658, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/r-j-saunders-co-v-united-states-cusc-1961.