Legal Opinion

United States v. Vandegrift & Co.

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided May 26, 1922No. 2149Published

1Opinion of the CourtSmith, Judge

Certain rugs imported at the port of Philadelphia and classified by thecollector of customs as Axminster rugs were assessed for duty at 50 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 300 of the tariff act of 1913, which paragraph reads as follows:

300. Carpets of every description, woven whole for rooms, and Oriental, Berlin, Aubusson, Axminster, and similar rugs, 50 per centum ad valorem.

*334The importer protested that the rugs were dutiable at 35 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 293 by virtue of paragraph 303, which said paragraphs in so far as pertinent are as follows:

293. Aubusson, Axminster,…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Beuttell v. MagoneSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
  2. Beuttell & Sons v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1918
  3. Beuttell v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1916
  4. United States v. Carson, Pirie, Scott & Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1918
  5. United States v. Gertzen Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1918

2 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