Pukel v. United States
United States Customs Court
1Opinion of the Court
Maletz, Judge:
The imported merchandise included in this case was invoiced as “7,000 musical movements 12 teeth in plastic shells, heavy duty type with 1" ring keys” and “7,000 4" bent rods.” It was classified under item 737.90 of the Tariff Schedules of the United States as parts of toys and assessed with duty at the rate of 35 percent ad valorem.1 Plaintiff claims that the merchandise is properly dutiable at the rate of 16 percent ad valorem, under item 726.75 of the Tariff Schedules of the United States, as “movements and other parts of music boxes.”2
First, defendant has moved to dismiss…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Davies v. ArthurSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Herrman v. RobertsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- United States v. BorgfeldtCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1926
- Chas. Kurz Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1966
- Lador, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1940
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- W. R. Filbin & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1969
- Burrows Equipment Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1969
- Amico, Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1978
- Amico, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1977