CIT Orders New Trial on Classification of White Sauce
In International Custom Products, Inc. ("ICP") v. U.S., the Court of International Trade stated that neither ICP nor the Government had submitted sufficient evidence for the Court to render a decision and stated that a new trial would be necessary to resolve the issue.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
In this case, ICP sought relief from an action taken by Customs to reclassify 100 entries of "white sauce" under a different tariff heading (HTS 0405.20) than the one provided in a 1999 advance classification ruling (HTS 2103.90). In support of its action, ICP made three claims.
ICP's initial claim was that Customs had violated 19 USC 1625 (c)(1), by revoking or attempting to revoke its advance ruling to ICP with a notice of action. The CIT stated that this claim could not be substantiated because ICP had not established whether or not the "white sauce" in the entry at issue contained the same percentage of milk fat as identified in the advance ruling.
In their second claim, ICP stated that Customs had violated 19 USC 1625 (c)(2), by effecting or modifying classification treatment previously accorded by Customs to substantially identical transactions. Again, the CIT stated that this claim could not be substantiated because ICP had not identified any entries of "white sauce" classified under HTS 2103.90.
ICP also claimed that Customs had violated ICP's due process rights under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The CIT stated that since ICP could not establish that the "white sauce," as entered, conformed to the description in the advance ruling, Customs could not have violated ICP's due process rights.
The CIT stated that the evidence offered by the Government that ICP might have made a material misstatement or omission to obtain the advance classification ruling, while pertinent, was not sufficient and should be addressed and resolved at trial.
Slip Op. 09-8 (dated 01/29/09) available at: http://www.cit.uscourts.gov/slip_op/Slip_op09/Slip%20Op.%2009-8.pdf