T. M. James & Sons China Co. v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

T. M. James & Sons China Co. v. United States

17 Cust. Ct. 305, 1946 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 856

CourtUnited States Customs Court

DecidedSeptember 18, 1946

DocketNo. 6349; Entry No. 127-A, etc.

StatusPublished

This text of 17 Cust. Ct. 305 (T. M. James & Sons China 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

T. M. James & Sons China Co. v. United States, 17 Cust. Ct. 305, 1946 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 856 (cusc 1946).

Pincite

Opinion

Oliveb, Presiding Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement listed in schedule A, hereto attached and made a. part hereof, have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

(Stipulation omitted.)

On the agreed facts I find the export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the earthenware and chinaware here involved, and that such values are the appraised values, less the additions made by the importer on entry because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases. Insofar as the appeals relate to all other merchandise they are hereby dismissed.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.

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

Oliveb, Presiding Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement listed in schedule A, hereto attached and made a. part hereof, have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

(Stipulation omitted.)

On the agreed facts I find the export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the earthenware and chinaware here involved, and that such values are the appraised values, less the additions made by the importer on entry because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases. Insofar as the appeals relate to all other merchandise they are hereby dismissed.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

17 Cust. Ct. 305, 1946 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 856, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/t-m-james-sons-china-co-v-united-states-cusc-1946.