Harrigan Auto Parts Co. v. United States
United States Customs Court
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
- Worthington v. RobbinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- United States v. Bosch Magneto Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1926
- United States v. LyonCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1913
- United States v. American Bead Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1918
- 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
- Weather-Rite Sportswear Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1962
- J. E. Bernard & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1969
- Warehousing Service, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1966
- Ford Motor Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1962
- John H. Faunce Phila., Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1967
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.