Seprol, Inc. v. United States
United States Customs Court
1Opinion of the Court
Rao, Judge:
The two cases listed in the schedule of protests, which have been consolidated for purposes of trial, raise the question of the proper dutiable classification of certain imported face massagers or cosmetic applicators. This merchandise was classified by the collector of customs at the port of entry as household utensils, within the scope of paragraph 339 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as modified by the Sixth Protocol of Supplementary Concessions to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 91 Treas. Dec. 150, T.D. 54108, with the consequent assessment of duty at the rate of 17 per…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Bruce Duncan Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1960
- John A. Steer & Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1936
- United States v. Dryden Rubber Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1934
3Cited by7 opinions
- F. B. Vandegrift & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1964
- S.G.B. Steel Scaffolding & Shoring Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1979
- Kotake Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1967
- John A. Steer Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1964
- Prestigeline v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1975
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.