United States v. Wanamaker
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtBland, Judge
The importation, rock crystal beads graduated, faceted, cut, and strung, was classified as unfinished jewlery and returned for duty at 80 per centum ad valorem, under paragraph 1428 of the Tariff Act of 1922.
The protest of appellee claimed them to be dutiable at 20 per centum ad valorem, under paragraph 1429, or at 60 per centum ad valorem under the same paragraph, or under paragraphs 1403, 233, or 214. Appellee relies chiefly upon his claim of 20 per centum ad valorem, under paragraph 1429, as “semiprecious stones, cut but not set, and suitable for use in the manufacture of jewelry.”
Regardles…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- United States v. CitroenSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Klipstein v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1910
- Morse Bros. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1926
- United States v. EmrichCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1925
3Cited by17 opinions
- United States v. FloryCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1927
- United States v. Lamport Export Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1928
- Puerto Rican Handcrafts v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1953
- Stern v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1970
- Altieri v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1969
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.