Legal Opinion

United States v. Muehlstein

United States Customs Court

Decided May 6, 1959No. A.R.D. 106; Entry No. 772747-1/3PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Rao, Judge:

This is an application for review of a decision and judgment in a reappraisement proceeding wherein it was held that the proper basis of value of certain imported ebonite or hard rubber dust was foreign value, as that value is defined in section 402(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Administrative Act o'f 1938, and that, as to each of the grades of dust involved in the importation, such value was represented by the entered value.

Said section 402 (c), as amended, provides as follows:(e) Foreign Value. — The foreign value of imported merchandise shall be the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. United States v. RichardCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1927
  2. Pleissner v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1929

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. American Greiner Electronic, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1969
  2. Picard v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1966
  3. Clayton Chemical & Packaging Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
  4. Clayton Chemical & Packaging Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1962
  5. The United States v. Clayton Chemical & Packaging Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1965

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API