Case Name: Unitron Import Corporation J. T. Steeb & Co., Inc. v. United States
Court: United States Customs Court
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1962-08-29
Citations: 49 Cust. Ct. 368
Docket Number: Reap. Dec. 10318; Entry No. 3845, etc.
Parties: Unitron Import Corporation J. T. Steeb & Co., Inc. v. United States
Judges: 
Reporter: United States Customs Court Reports
Volume: 49
Pages: 368–369

Head Matter:
(Reap. Dec. 10318)
Entry No. 3845, etc.
Unitron Import Corporation J. T. Steeb & Co., Inc. v. United States
(Decided August 29, 1962)
Lawrence & Tuttle for the plaintiffs.
Joseph D. Guilfoyle, Acting Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Opinion:
OliveR, Chief Judge:
Counsel for tbe parties have submitted the appeals for reappraisement enumerated in the attached schedule for decision upon stipulation, reading as follows:
1. That the merchandise and the issues involved in the appeals for reap-praisement enumerated in Schedule "A" hereto attached and made a part hereof are the same in all material respects as those involved in United States v. Gitkin Co., A.R.D. 132, and that the record in the cited case may be incorporated in the record herein.
2. That at the time of 'exportation of the merchandise involved herein, the prices at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of the country of exportation for exportation to the United States, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade including the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other costs, charges and expenses incident to placing the merchandise in condition packed ready for shipment to the United States, were the appraised values, less the amounts described on the invoices under the heading "Actual Charges".
3. That the involved merchandise was entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after February 27, 1958, and is not identified in the Final List published by the Secretary of the Treasury pursuant to the Customs Simplification Act of 1956 (T.D. 54521).
On the agreed facts, I find export value, as defined in section 402 (b), Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, to be the proper basis for the determination of the values of the merchandise involved and that such values were the appraised values, less the amounts described on the invoices under the heading "Actual Charges."
Judgment will issue accordingly.