United States v. Innis
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Appeal from Board of United States General Appraisers, Abstract 38660.
1Opinion of the CourtMontgomeey, Presiding Judge
The merchandise in this case consists of sulphide of antimony, which substance is in fact a salt or compound of antimony, but not a salt or compound of antimony oxide. It was assessed for duty at 25 per cent ad valorem under the last clause of paragraph 144, tariff act of October 3, 1913, which paragraph reads as follows:
144, Antimony, as regulus or metal, and matte containing antimony but not containing more than ten per centum of lead, ten per centum ad valorem; antimony oxide, salts, and compounds of, twenty-five per centum ad valorem.
The Board of General Appraisers held that the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Maltus v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1916
- Breck & Son v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1911
3Cited by4 opinions
- Johnson Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1926
- Procter & Gamble Manufacturing Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1932
- C. B. Smith Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1970
- Koons, Wilson & Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1918