Legal Opinion

Frank P. Dow Co. v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided January 13, 1964No. 68234; protest 61/4839 (San Francisco)PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Ford, Judge:

An importation, described on the invoice as “One-YGS 471 Wehrhahn Gangsaw; One-Jansen Saw Tensioner; One-Key for eccentric buckles; 36 Pair of eccentric insertion buckles,” was classified by the collector of customs within the purview of paragraph 353 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as modified by the Torquay Protocol to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 86 Treas. Dec. 121, T.D. 52739, as articles having as an essential feature an electrical element or device, who assessed duty thereon at the rate of 13% per centum ad valorem.

It is the claim of plaintiffs herein that the…

2Cited by8 opinions

  1. Arnhold Ceramics, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1966
  2. Miller v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1967
  3. Soderhamn Machine Mfg. Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1965
  4. Berkley Machine Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1965
  5. F. B. Vandegrift & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1966

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API