United States v. Downing & Co.
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
Bland, Judge,
delivered tbe opinion of the court:
The appraiser’s answer to the protest is as follows:
The merchandise in question consists of chrome steel tubes, n. s. p. f., and was returned for duty as such at 25 % ad val. under par. 328, and in addition 8 % ad valorem under par. 305, of the act of 1922.
According to the testimony the importation consists of chrome steel tubes which are made of steel containing approximately 1 per centum of carbon and 1)4 per centum of chromium. The merchandise is “commonly called high carbon, high chrome steel tubing,” and is used “to make ball bearings — the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Tide Water Oil Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
- United States v. RichterCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1911
- Ball v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1917
3Cited by5 opinions
- United States v. FrankCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1927
- Watson v. York Metal & Alloys Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1927
- United States v. J. A. Schneider & Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1934
- Watson v. York Metal & Alloys Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1927
- Watson v. York Metal & Alloys Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1927