United States v. Gertzen Co.
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Appeal from Board of United States General Appraisers, Abstract 40719. [Oral argument Apr. 19,1918, by Mr. Lawrence and Mr. washburn.)
1Opinion of the CourtMartiN, Judge
The merchandise in this case is described by the appraiser as “Axminster rugs.’’ They were returned for duty and were assessed under the eo nomine enumeration of Axminster rugs in paragraph 300, tariff act of 1913, at the rate of 50 per cent ad valorem.
*429The importers protested against the assessment, the following being a copy in full of the protest:
Sir: We hereby notify you that we are dissatisfied with the rate of duty fixed and liquidated by you on the following shipment imported by us in the S. S. Samla/nd February 16,1914, marked “R. D. No. 4065,” imported February 16, entry No. 47177,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Beuttell & Sons v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1918
3Cited by2 opinions
- United States v. Vandegrift & Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1922
- United States v. Vandegrift & Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1922