Joseph Weiss Co. v. United States
United States Customs Court
1Opinion of the Court
Mollison, Judge:
The merchandise the subject of these two protests, which were consolidated for trial and disposition, consists of a substance known as artificial corundum. It was assessed with duty at the rate of 1 cent per pound under the provision in paragraph 1514 of the Tariff Act of 1930 for “artificial abrasives, in grains,” and is claimed to be properly dutiable at the rate of one-half of 1 cent per pound under the provision in the same paragraph, as modified by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, T. D. 51802, for “corundum, * * * in grains.” The issue is therefore whether the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Klipstein v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1913
- Larzelere & Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1917
- United States v. Schering & GlatzCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1908
3Cited by4 opinions
- A. N. Deringer, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1957
- Christensen Diamond Products Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1965
- Engelhard Hanovia, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1965
- Brookside Veneers, Ltd. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1986