Legal Opinion

A. N. Deringer, Inc. v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided May 6, 1958No. Reap. Dec. 9145; Entry No. A-4897PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Rao, Judge:

The instant appeal for reappraisement has had a somewhat protracted history. It is before me now by virtue of an order dated December 7, 1956, 37 Oust. Ot. 591, Reap. Dec. 8708, restoring the case to the calendar “for the sole purpose of permitting the intro*811duction of evidence by both parties with respect to the addition for profit called for by paragraph (4) of the cost of production statute, section 402 (f) of the Tariff Act of 1930.” Said section 402 (f) reads as follows:(f) Cost of Production. — For the purpose of this title the cost of production of imported merchandise shall…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1922
  2. Glanson Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1953
  3. A. N. Deringer, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1955

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Chicago Bird & Cage Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1963
  2. Maher-App & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1970
  3. Chicago Bird & Cage Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1966
  4. National Carloading Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1971

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

Powered by the Exa API