Legal Opinion

Harrigan Auto Parts Co. v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided April 24, 1961No. C.D. 2252PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Foed, Judge:

An importation described on the invoice as “Brass Brake Lining Bivets Semi Tubular” was assessed with duty at tlie rate of 15 per centum ad valorem under the provisions of paragraph *169332 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as modified by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 82 Treas. Dec. 305, T.D. 51802, which reads as follows:

Rivets, studs, and steel points, lathed, machined, or brightened, and rivets or studs for nonskidding automobile tires. 15% ad val.

Plaintiff contends the imported merchandise is properly dutiable at the rate of 11 per centum ad valorem under the provisions…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Worthington v. RobbinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
  2. United States v. Bosch Magneto Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1926
  3. United States v. LyonCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1913
  4. United States v. American Bead Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1918
  5. Athenia Steel & Wire Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1911

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Weather-Rite Sportswear Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1962
  2. J. E. Bernard & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1969
  3. Warehousing Service, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1966
  4. Ford Motor Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1962
  5. John H. Faunce Phila., Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1967

1 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