Parker-Hartford Corp. v. United States
United States Customs Court
1Opinion of the Court
Oliver, Judge:
The merchandise the subject of these protests consists of certain projectorscopes, profiloscopes, and parts thereof. They were classified under paragraph 228 (b), Tariff Act of 1930, as optical instruments, not specially provided for, or as microscopes, not specially provided for, both classifications dutiable at the rate of 45 per centum ad valorem. Plaintiff contends that they are properly classifiable as parts of machine tools, not specially provided for, under the provisions of paragraph 372 of said act, as modified by T.D. 51802, and dutiable at the rate of 15 per centum ad…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Engis Equipment Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1959
- Engis Equipment Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1963
3Cited by3 opinions
- Chas. Kurz Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1966
- Engis Equipment Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1968
- Parker-Hartford Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1967