Legal Opinion

F. B. Vandegrift & Co. v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided April 4, 1966No. C.D. 2644PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Ford, Judge:

An importation of two complete oil fired tilting melting furnaces, types 320/500 600/1200, was as en-tireties by the collector of customs under the provisions of paragraph 353 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as modified by the Torquay Protocol to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 86 Treas. Dec. 121, T.D. 52739,1 as articles having as an essential feature an electrical element or device and consequently assessed with duty at the rate of 13% per centum ad valorem.

Plaintiff claims that with respect to certain firebricks and cement the classification is erroneous, and the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Keer, Maurer Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1962
  2. Sullivan v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1961
  3. United States v. Myers & Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1922
  4. Henry A. Wess, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1959
  5. Holmes v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1956

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Arnhold Ceramics, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1966
  2. Rembar Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1966
  3. Castelazo & Associates Atwood Imports, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1970
  4. F. B. Vandegrift & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1969
  5. F. B. Vandegrift & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1968

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

Powered by the Exa API