
    (V. D. 30)
    Entry No. 786835, etc.
    Tanross Supply Co. et al. v. United States
    (Decided September 19, 1956)
    
      Jordan & Klingaman {Jacob L. Klingaman of counsel) for the plaintiffs.
    
      George Cochran Doub, Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.
   Wilson, Judge:

These matters are presently before me on remands from classification proceedings decided by the first division of this court in Tanross Supply Co. et al. v. United States, 34 Cust. Ct. 260, Abstract 58687; Ocean Photo Supply Co., Inc., and Charles Happel, Inc. v. United States, 34 Cust. Ct. 313, Abstract 58860. The judgments entered therein stated: “* * * that the matters be remanded to a single judge in reappraisement pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U. S. C. § 2636 (d).”

The matters have been submitted for decision upon an agreed statement of facts entered into by and between counsel for the respective parties hereto.

Upon the agreed facts, I find the export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U. S. C. § 1402 (d)), to be the proper basis for determining the values of the involved merchandise and that such values are as set forth in schedule “A,” hereto attached and made a part hereof.

I further find such values to be the dutiable values of said merchandise.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.  