Legal Opinion

Westinghouse Air Brake Co. v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided April 12, 1951No. C. D. 1319PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

La wren CB, Judge:

This controversy relates to an importation described on the consular invoice as “Water Cylinder Top Head Monel Liners.” The collector of customs classified the merchandise as articles not specially provided for, composed of metal, as provided in paragraph 397 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U. S. C. § 1001, par. 397), and assessed duty thereon at the rate of 45 per centum ad valorem. An additional duty of three-fourths of 1 cent per pound was assessed upon the copper content pursuant to section 3425 of the Internal Revenue Code (26 U. S. C. § 3425). This latter assessment is…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Richardson Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1917
  2. Landay Bros. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1915

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Foster Wheeler Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1968
  2. Young Windows, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1955
  3. Green Fuel Economizer Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1966
  4. Gamble Vargish & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1960
  5. Carroll v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1959

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

Powered by the Exa API