Woolworth Co. v. United States
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtBarber, Judge
Section 489 of the Tariff Act of 1922, after providing for the assess-jnent of additional duties on importations undervalued on entry, provides that—
•■Such additional duties shall not be construed to be penal and shall not be remitted nor payment thereof in any way avoided, except in the case of a manifest clerical error, upon the order of the Secretary of the Treasury, or in any case ■upon the finding of the Board of General Appraisers, upon a petition filed and •supported by satisfactory evidence under such rules as the board may prescribe, that the entry of the merchandise at a less value…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Norton v. Shelby CountySupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Chicago, Indianapolis & Louisville Railway Co. v. HackettSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
- United States v. FishSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
- Klein v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1925
- Fish v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1924
3Cited by5 opinions
- United States v. FinkelsteinCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1927
- Erskine v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1926
- Linck v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1926
- Richard v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1926
- United States v. BrightCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1932