Rachman Bag Co. v. United States
United States Customs Court
1Opinion of the Court
Rao, Chief Judge:
The merchandise involved in these protests, which have been consolidated for purposes of trial, was described on the invoices as “Old burlap bags and bagging.” The collector classified 30 percent of the merchandise on each shipment as waste bagging entitled to free entry pursuant to the provisions of paragraph 1617 of the Tariff Act of 1930 and the remaining 70 percent'thereof as bags, wholly of jute, printed, stenciled, etc., dutiable at the rate of 7% per centum ad valorem, plus % cent per pound, as provided in paragraph 1018 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as modified by the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Patton v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- S. S. Kresge Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1950
- Ash v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1928
- Darmstadt Scott & Courtney v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1945
- John I. Haas, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1947
3Cited by4 opinions
- Cheltenham Supply Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1969
- Studner v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1969
- Coppersmith v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1970
- Studner v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1969