Holmes v. United States
United States Customs Court
1Opinion of the Court
Rao, Judge:
In this action, we are asked to determine the proper dutiable status of certain parts of pneumatic chip conveyors, consisting of five blower motor assemblies and one feeder with motor. This merchandise was classified by the collector of customs at the port of Seattle, Wash., as “Parts of machines (blowers) having an electric motor as an essential feature” and assessed with duty at the rate of 17% per centum ad valorem within the provisions of paragraph 353 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as modified by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 82 Treas. Dec. 305, T. D. 51802.
It is…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- John P. Herber & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1953
- Hughes Fawcett, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1952
- Pitman Publishing Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1952
- Protest 878024-G of Pacific Molasses Co.United States Customs Court · 1939
3Cited by11 opinions
- Arnhold Ceramics, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1966
- Henry A. Wess, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1959
- Miller v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1967
- Consolidated International Equipment & Supply Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1966
- F. B. Vandegrift & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1966
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.