Roberts Mfg. Co. v. United States

6 Cust. Ct. 259, 1941 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 65
CourtUnited States Customs Court
DecidedApril 25, 1941
DocketC. D. 477
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 6 Cust. Ct. 259 (Roberts Mfg. 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
Roberts Mfg. Co. v. United States, 6 Cust. Ct. 259, 1941 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 65 (cusc 1941).

Opinion

EvaNS, Judge:

Tbis is an action wherein the importer seeks to recover certain amounts of money claimed to have been unlawfully assessed on an importation of merchandise designated on the invoice as tennis ball covers, which was imported from England and entered at the port of Los Angeles. The collector classified the merchandise as manufactures of wool, and assessed duty at 50 per centum ad va-lorem under the provisions of paragraph 1120 of the Tariff Act of 1930. The protest claims that the merchandise is dutiable at 20 per centum ad valorem under paragraph 1502 of the same act, or by timely amendment thereto, at 30 per centum ad valorem under paragraph 1502 of the Tariff Act of 1930. The respective provisions of the act, so far as they relate to the commodity, are as follows:

Par. 1120. All manufactures, wholly or in chief value of wool, not specially provided for, 50 per centum ad valorem.
Par. 1502. Boxing gloves, baseballs, footballs, tennis balls, golf balls, and all other balls, of whatever material composed, finished or unfinished, primarily designed for use in physical exercise (whether or not such exercise involves the element of sport), and all clubs, rackets, bats, golf tees, and other equipment, such as is ordinarily used in conjunction therewith, all the foregoing, not specially provided for, 30 per centum ad valorem; ice and roller skates, and parts thereof, 20 per centum ad valorem.

At the hearing the attorney for the importer made the following introductory statement:

The merchandise the subject of this protest was classified as manufactures of wool at 50 per cent under paragraph 1120 of the Tariff Act of 1930. It is claimed to be properly dutiable at 20 per cent under paragraph 1502 as tennis balls, or balls finished or unfinished, which is the rate or duty to which the trade agreement reduced the tariff rate; that is, the Trade Agreement with Great Britain. We also contend that the merchandise is dutiable at 30 per cent under paragraph 1502 which is the normal rate specified in that paragraph for balls, including tennis balls, finished or unfinished. We contend that the merchandise in this importation should be classified as balls, or tennis balls, unfinished.

The trade agreement to which reference is made is published in T. D. 49753, promulgated November 28, 1938. Said trade agree[261]*261ment makes four changes in the rate as provided in paragraph 1502, supra, the first two of which are as follows:

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

Related

Hudson Merchandise Co. v. United States
58 Cust. Ct. 341 (U.S. Customs Court, 1967)
William Adams, Inc. v. United States
56 Cust. Ct. 429 (U.S. Customs Court, 1966)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
6 Cust. Ct. 259, 1941 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 65, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roberts-mfg-co-v-united-states-cusc-1941.