Reliance Merchandise Co. v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

Reliance Merchandise Co. v. United States

57 Cust. Ct. 496, 1966 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1674

CourtUnited States Customs Court

DecidedDecember 14, 1966

DocketC.D. 2852

StatusPublished

This text of 57 Cust. Ct. 496 (Reliance Merchandise 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

Reliance Merchandise Co. v. United States, 57 Cust. Ct. 496, 1966 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1674 (cusc 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

Rao, Chief Judge:

The merchandise covered by this protest consists of battery-operated lanterns which were assessed with duty at the rate of 19 per centum ad valorem pursuant to the provision in paragraph 339 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as modified by the Sixth Protocol of Supplementary Concessions to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 91 Treas. Dec. 150, T.D. 54108, for household utensils, not specially provided for, wholly or in chief value of base metal.

It is claimed in said protest that the merchandise in issue consists of articles having as an essential feature an electrical element or device within the purview of paragraph 353 of said act, as modified by the Torquay Protocol to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 86 Treas. Dec. 121, T.D. 52739, which are dutiable at the rate of 13% per centum ad valorem.

This protest has been submitted for decision upon a written stipulation of counsel for the respective parties hereto to the effect that said merchandise, assessed as above and represented by the invoice items marked “A” and checked JB, by Examiner J. Bistreich, consists of battery-operated lanterns which contain as an essential feature an electrical element or device, which are not illuminating or lighting fixtures or lamps, and which do not contain any electrical heating elements as constituent parts.

Upon the agreed facts, we hold the merchandise here in issue, identified by invoice items marked and checked as aforesaid, to be dutiable at the rate of 13% per centum ad valorem pursuant to the provisions in paragraph 353 of said tariff act, as modified by said Torquay protocol, for articles having as an essential feature an electrical element or device. The claim in the protest to that effect is sustained. All other claims are, however, overruled.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.

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

Rao, Chief Judge:

The merchandise covered by this protest consists of battery-operated lanterns which were assessed with duty at the rate of 19 per centum ad valorem pursuant to the provision in paragraph 339 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as modified by the Sixth Protocol of Supplementary Concessions to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 91 Treas. Dec. 150, T.D. 54108, for household utensils, not specially provided for, wholly or in chief value of base metal.

It is claimed in said protest that the merchandise in issue consists of articles having as an essential feature an electrical element or device within the purview of paragraph 353 of said act, as modified by the Torquay Protocol to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 86 Treas. Dec. 121, T.D. 52739, which are dutiable at the rate of 13% per centum ad valorem.

This protest has been submitted for decision upon a written stipulation of counsel for the respective parties hereto to the effect that said merchandise, assessed as above and represented by the invoice items marked “A” and checked JB, by Examiner J. Bistreich, consists of battery-operated lanterns which contain as an essential feature an electrical element or device, which are not illuminating or lighting fixtures or lamps, and which do not contain any electrical heating elements as constituent parts.

Upon the agreed facts, we hold the merchandise here in issue, identified by invoice items marked and checked as aforesaid, to be dutiable at the rate of 13% per centum ad valorem pursuant to the provisions in paragraph 353 of said tariff act, as modified by said Torquay protocol, for articles having as an essential feature an electrical element or device. The claim in the protest to that effect is sustained. All other claims are, however, overruled.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

57 Cust. Ct. 496, 1966 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1674, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reliance-merchandise-co-v-united-states-cusc-1966.