Wray v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

Wray v. United States

15 Cust. Ct. 367, 1945 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1020

CourtUnited States Customs Court

DecidedJune 22, 1945

DocketNo. 6176; EntryNo. 710071, etc.

StatusPublished

This text of 15 Cust. Ct. 367 (Wray 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

Wray v. United States, 15 Cust. Ct. 367, 1945 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1020 (cusc 1945).

Pincite

Opinion

Cole, Judge:

These appeals for reappraisement have been submitted for decision on a written stipulation, filed June 12, 1945, wherein tbe parties agree that the issues presented herein are tbe same as those decided in United States v. Alfred Dunhill of London, Inc. (suit No. 4481), C. A. D. 305 and that tbe record in that case may be incorporated herein.

In tbe incorporated case, tbe court found cost of production, section 402 (f), to be tbe proper basis for appraisement, and held that the so-called British purchase tax, described in the law of the,United Kingdom entitled, “Finance (No. 2) Act, 1940 3 & 4 Geo. 6 Ch. 48,” was not an item to be included in the “usual general expenses” contemplated within subdivision (2) of section 402 (f), supra, and therefore not to be calculated in determining such statutory value.

On the agreement of counsel that the several elements entering into the statutory cost of production of the items in question are equal to the appraised values thereof, less the additions made by the importer on entry because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases, I hold such values to be the cost of production, section 402 (f), supra, which I find to be the proper basis for appraisement of the instant-merchandise. Judgment will be rendered accordingly.

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

Cole, Judge:

These appeals for reappraisement have been submitted for decision on a written stipulation, filed June 12, 1945, wherein tbe parties agree that the issues presented herein are tbe same as those decided in United States v. Alfred Dunhill of London, Inc. (suit No. 4481), C. A. D. 305 and that tbe record in that case may be incorporated herein.

In tbe incorporated case, tbe court found cost of production, section 402 (f), to be tbe proper basis for appraisement, and held that the so-called British purchase tax, described in the law of the,United Kingdom entitled, “Finance (No. 2) Act, 1940 3 & 4 Geo. 6 Ch. 48,” was not an item to be included in the “usual general expenses” contemplated within subdivision (2) of section 402 (f), supra, and therefore not to be calculated in determining such statutory value.

On the agreement of counsel that the several elements entering into the statutory cost of production of the items in question are equal to the appraised values thereof, less the additions made by the importer on entry because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases, I hold such values to be the cost of production, section 402 (f), supra, which I find to be the proper basis for appraisement of the instant-merchandise. Judgment will be rendered accordingly.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

15 Cust. Ct. 367, 1945 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1020, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wray-v-united-states-cusc-1945.