Protest 920850-G of Parfumerie Lubin Co. , 1 Cust. Ct. 548 ( 1938 )

Opinion by

Sullivan, J.

From the evidence it was found that the merchandise is bottles “suitable for use and of the character ordinarily employed for the holding or transportation of merchandise,” perfumes, cologne, and toilet water. In view of the evidence and samples and on the authority of United States v. Hudnut (17 C. C. P. A. 207, T. D. 43649) the perfume bottles in question were held dutiable at the appropriate rate under paragraph 217 as claimed.