Legal Opinion

A. W. Fenton Co. v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided June 5, 1958No. C. D. 2002PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Rao, Judge:

This case is concerned with the matter of the dutiable status of an importation invoiced as “ ‘Siroco’ agricultural dusters, latest model complete with 1-quart hopper, extension tube and *328deflector.” The collector of customs at the port of entry classified the merchandise in question as machines, not specially provided for, and, accordingly, assessed duty thereon at the rate of 13% per centum ad valorem, pursuant to the provisions of paragraph 372 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.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. United States v. BokerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1915
  2. Klipstein v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1910
  3. United States v. TowerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1916
  4. United States v. Lewis & CongerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1928

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Hoffschlaeger Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1968
  2. C. J. Tower & Sons of Buffalo, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1969
  3. Styson Art Products Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1970
  4. Western Oilfields Supply Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1969
  5. S. Jackson & Son v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1970

1 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