Legal Opinion

Lanvin Parfums, Inc. v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided June 8, 1965No. C.D. 2543PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Rao, Judge:

Certain merchandise described as atomizers or atomizer tops was classified by the collector of customs as articles or wares, not specially provided for, composed in chief value of aluminum, in paragraph 397 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. § 1001, par. 397), as modified by the Sixth Protocol of Supplementary Concessions to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 91 Treas. Dec. 150, T.D. 54108, and duty was imposed thereon at the rate of 19 per centum ad valorem.

Various claims for lower rates of duty have been made in the protest or by amendment thereto. The one relied upon…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. General Systems Service, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1957
  2. United Merchandising Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1959
  3. Coppersmith v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1959
  4. L. Oppleman, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1939
  5. Werner v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1962

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. APF Electronics Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1979
  2. Irving W. Rice & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1967

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API