General
H. J. Heinz Co. v. United States
15 Cust. Ct. 426·United States Customs Court·1945
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
H. J. Heinz Co. v. United States
No. 6218.
Invoice dated Leamington, Canada, August 8, 1941.
Certified August 9, 1941.
Entered at Pittsburgh., Pa., August 13, 1941.
Entry No. 53.
(Decided September 18, 1945)
Jerome G. Clifford for the plaintiff.
Paul P. Rao, Assistant Attorney General (John J. McDermott, special attorney), for the defendant.
[MAJORITY — Kincheloe, Judge:]
Kincheloe, Judge:
When this' appeal for reappraisement was called for hearing, counsel for the respective parties submitted the appeal on a statement of facts agreeing in substance that the proper basis of valuation is cost of production and that such value is $0.4679 per each #12 tin of 128 fluid ounces, Canadian currency.
I therefore find the cost of production, as that value is defined in section 402 (f) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the involved merchandise, and that such value is $0.4679 per each #12 tin of 128 fluid ounces, Canadian currency.
Judgment will be rendered accordingly.