C.F.R. » Title 19 » CHAPTER I—U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY; DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY › PART 10—ARTICLES CONDITIONALLY FREE, SUBJECT TO A REDUCED RATE, ETC. › Subpart A—General Provisions

19 C.F.R. § 10.112

Filing free entry documents or reduced duty documents after entry

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

Whenever a free entry or a reduced duty document, form, or statement required to be filed in connection with the entry is not filed at the time of the entry or within the period for which a bond was filed for its production, but failure to file it was not due to willful negligence or fraudulent intent, such document, form, or statement may be filed at any time prior to liquidation of the entry or, if the entry was liquidated, before the liquidation becomes final. See § 113.43(c) of this chapter for satisfaction of the bond and cancellation of the bond charge.

[T.D. 74-227, 39 FR 32015, Sept. 4, 1974]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 24 cases, 1972–2019 · leading case: Ford Motor Co. v. United States, 715 F.3d 906 (Fed. Cir. 2013).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Ford Motor Co. v. United States, 715 F.3d 906 (Fed. Cir. 2013). · cites it 30× “§ 1520 (d) requires Ford to file the relevant certificates of origin (“COs”) within one year, and that its failure to do so could not be excused by 19 C.F.R. § 10.112 . Nevertheless, because Customs has failed to adequately explain why it treats post-entry claims for refunds…”
Gulfstream Aerospace Corp. v. United States, 21 Ct. Int'l Trade 1083 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1997). · cites it 15× “§ 1520 (1988) or 19 C.F.R. § 10.112 (1990), which allow an importer to correct the filing failure and obtain duty-free treatment for its civil aircraft parts.”
Aviall of Texas, Inc. v. United States, 18 Ct. Int'l Trade 727 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1994). · cites it 12× “§§ 1514 , 1520(c)(1), and 19 C.F.R. § 10.112 . 6 Second, Aviall argues that the regulation, as interpreted, denies the statutory right of protest and the regulatory right to submit documents under 19 C.”
Xerox Corp. v. United States, 423 F.3d 1356 (Fed. Cir. 2005). · cites it 5× “Xerox also points to 19 C.F.R. § 10.112 , a regulation that allows an importer to file, before liquidation becomes final, any document necessary for free or reduced duties under any agreement if the importer’s failure to file upon entry was not the result of willful negligence…”
Ford Motor Co. v. United States, 635 F.3d 550 (Fed. Cir. 2011). · cites it 4× “Ford argued that Customs should have accepted its late-filed certificates pursuant to 19 C.F.R. § 10.112 , which provides that, [wjhenever a free entry or a reduced duty document, form, or statement required to be filed in connection with the entry is not filed at the time of…”
Ford Motor Co. v. United States, 800 F. Supp. 2d 1349 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2011). · cites it 4× “Plaintiff responds that Customs’ regulation 19 C.F.R. § 10.112 excuses the late filing of its certificates.”
Zojirushi Am. Corp. v. United States, 2016 CIT 78 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2016). · cites it 3× “In Count III, Zojirushi repeats the claim stated in Count I and contends that the guidance document is an effective repeal of a Customs regulation, 19 C.F.R. § 10.112 , which Zoji-rushi construes to allow post-entry GSP claims.”
Audiovox Corp. v. United States, 598 F. Supp. 387 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1984). · cites it 3× “Plaintiff’s second argument is that it could validly request duty-free treatment under the GSP in its protests of the reliquidations, and cites 19 C.F.R. § 10.112 , which provides, in pertinent part, that the appropriate duty-free document “may be filed at any time prior to…”
Corrpro Companies, Inc. v. United States, 433 F.3d 1360 (Fed. Cir. 2006). · cites it 2× “Second, the trial court held that Corrpro’s post-importation submission of NAFTA Certificates of Origin met the procedural requirements of 19 C.F.R. § 10.112 because Corrpro’s delay in submission had resulted from its adherence to Customs’ classification ruling.”
Mattel, Inc. v. United States, 67 C.C.P.A. 74 (C.C.P.A. 1980). · cites it 2× “1 was required, as determined by the Customs Court, the requirement was satisfied by its tender of the documents to the Customs Court before final liquidation under 19 CFR 10.112, which permits late filing where failure to timely file “was not due to willful negligence or…”
Aviall of Texas, Inc. v. United States, 70 F.3d 1248 (Fed. Cir. 1995). “183 , and the applicability of 19 C.F.R. § 10.112 and § 141.64 to this ease.”
C. J. Tower & Sons of Buffalo, Inc. v. United States, 336 F. Supp. 1395 (Cust. Ct. 1972). “The applicable regulations are found in 19 C.F.R. § 10.112 and §§ 10.104(c) and 10.”
Show all 24 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.