G. Joannou Cycle Co. v. United States
United States Customs Court
1Opinion of the Court
Lawrence, Judge:
An importation from Hong Kong described on the consular invoice as “Chromium Plated Cycle Horns” was classified by the collector of customs as parts of bicycles, and duty was imposed thereon at the rate of 30 per centum ad valorem, as provided in paragraph 371 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. § 1001, par. 371).
Plaintiff claims, by its protest, that the articles are not parts of bicycles but are “properly dutiable at 13%% under Par. 353 as modified” (19 U.S.C. § 1001, par. 353), the modification being the Torquay Protocol to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 86…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- United States v. American Bead Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1918
- Spiegel Bros. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1942
- American Import Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1957
- New York Merchandise Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1949
3Cited by84 opinions
- Sherwin International, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1965
- Oxford International Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1973
- Ford Motor Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1962
- Victoria Distributors, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1968
- United Import Sales, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1967
79 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.