Legal Opinion

Kaufman & Vlnson Co. v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided May 24, 1960No. C.D. 2180PublishedCited by 25 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Lawrence, Judge:

The merchandise involved in this protest is identified herein as a map measure compass. It was classified as a mathematical instrument, composed wholly or in chief value of metal, and not plated with gold, silver, or platinum, not specially provided for, in paragraph 360 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. § 1001, par. 360), as modified by the Torquay Protocol to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 86 Treas. Dec. 121, T.D. 52739, supplemented by Presidential notification, 86 Treas. Dec. 337, T.D. 52820, which provides for duty at the rate of 30 per centum ad valorem.

Pl…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Silberstein v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1912

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. V. Alexander & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1967
  2. United-Carr Fastener Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1966
  3. Janex Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1978
  4. Castelazo & Associates v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1968
  5. United Carr Fastener Corp. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1967

20 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