or by their saccharine strength * * Id. at 700 (emphasis added). In fact, the Court remarked “ [i]f the manufacturer uses * * * bleaching processes in order to make his sugars more salable, why may he not omit to do so in order to render them less dutiable; nay, why may he not employ an extra quantity of molasses for that purpose?” Id. at 704. The Court noted that if color was added to the sugar following manufacture that “might be a different matter.” Id. at 705. In this case, on the agency record before the Court, there is no evidence that refined sugar is combined with molasses to produce the sugar syrup, and thus the limitation on the Court’s holding is not applicable. After determining that Congress had clearly adopted a color t precedent to the evidence on th CIT 288, 292 (1984) (<HOLDING>). From the line of cases above, Customs and
holding that despite alleged uses articles must be classified in their condition as imported holding that the amendment was a use regulation which was in effect a condition on the use of property in the affected zone holding that absent a use provision the article had to be classified on its condition as imported holding that flax straw was specifically enumerated without qualification as to use and despite stipulation that it was to be used for paper making it had to be classified in its condition as imported holding that the dutiable classification of gunstocks must be made on their condition as imported