Central Warehouse Co. v. United States
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtHatfield, Judge
The merchandise involved in this appeal consists of rugs made of Japanese rice straw. The imported articles were assessed for duty by the collector at 40 per cent ad valorem, as “floor coverings not specially provided for,” under paragraph 1022, of the tariff act of 1922, which reads as follows:
Par. 1022. Common China, Japan, and India straw matting, and floor coverings made therefrom, 3 cents per square yard; carpets, carpeting, mats, matting, and rugs, made wholly of cotton, flax, hemp, or jute, or a mixture thereof, 35 per centum ad valorem; all other floor coverings not specially provided…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Hedden v. RichardSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Arthur v. CummingSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
- United States v. Davies Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1922
- Pritchard & Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1911
- Stone & Downer Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1923
3Cited by2 opinions
- Railway Express Agency, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1951
- Central Warehouse Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1926