De Haan Co. v. United States
United States Customs Court
1Opinion of the Court
Nichols, Judge:
The merchandise covered by the protests herein consists of footwear, imported from Mexico during 1944 and 1945. It *40was assessed with duty at 20 per centum ad valorem under paragraph 1530(e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as footwear wholly or in chief value of leather and is claimed to be dutiable at 10 per centum ad valorem under said paragraph, as modified by the trade agreement with Mexico, T.D. 50797, as huaraches.
The pertinent provisions of the tariff act are as follows:
Par. 1530. * * *
ij: í¡í í¡í ;J:(e) Boots, shoes, or other footwear (including athletic or sporting boots and…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Hartford Electric Light Co. v. Federal Power CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1942
- Goat & Sheepskin Import Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1914
- Kaysons Import Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1966
- Joleo Impex Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1960
- Gitkin Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1965
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Citizen Band of Potawatomi Indians v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1967
- Dushoff Distributing Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1973
- Western States Import Co., Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998
- Mexican American Import Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1971
- Selectile Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1974