Court Opinion

ID: 8099593
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-09-09 14:23:51.394946+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:38:37.202873
License: Public Domain

*460Opinion by
Johnson, J.
At the trial it was stipulated that the issues and facts herein are similar in all material respects to those involved in United States v. Browne Vintners Co., Inc. (34 C. C. P. A. 112, C. A. D. 351) and that the one case of earthenware, number 3258/6, reported by the inspector as manifested, not found, was not in fact received by the importer. In accordance with stipulation of counsel and following the decision cited it was held that duty is not assessable upon such portions of the merchandise as were reported by the inspector as manifested, not found. The protest was sustained to this extent.