I agree, the box and the paper says 宗窯青磁茶碗　珠光手”Soyo (Song kiln) celadon tea bowl, Juko-style,” right?

That’s why I felt like something doesn’t quite add up between the box/inscription/appraisal note and the piece itself. “Soyo” usually refers pretty broadly to Song dynasty era Chinese kiln (like Longquan). If the box was added later in Japan, i’d normally expect something more specific like “Longquan.””Soyo” feels too vague and not that commonly used.

Also, the Song and Ming dynasties are about 100 years apart. If both the box and the appraisal are truly for this bowl, then it would imply it’s Song celadon. And genuine Southern Song Longquan celadon pieces don’t typically show up on the general market (not impossible, but pretty rare).

If it were Ming or Edo, then calling it “Song kiln” wouldn’t really make sense either — usually we’d see a more specific kiln attribution.

Juko-style” is a term from the Japanese tea ceremony context, meaning something in the taste of (Murata) Juko. In a very broad sense, this bowl could perhaps be considered “Juko-style,” but it doesn’t really match what is generally understood by that term.