Charitable purpose and general public utility: promotion of trade and industry can qualify despite incidental member benefits and legislative activity.

Income from property was exempt where the assessee's memorandum bound its assets and income to be applied solely to its stated objects, and those objects were held to advance an object of general public utility. Promotion and protection of trade, commerce and industry was treated as beneficial to the public by promoting economic prosperity, and incidental benefit to members or traders did not defeat charitable character. A clause allowing action for or against legislation affecting trade was only ancillary and did not make the purposes political. The dominant purpose remained public utility, not private gain, so the exemption was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the income derived from property held by the assessee was exempt as property held under a legal obligation wholly for charitable purposes, namely advancement of an object of general public utility.

Analysis: The income from property qualifies for exemption when the property is held under trust or other legal obligation and is held wholly or partly for religious or charitable purposes. The assessee's memorandum bound its property and income to be applied solely to its stated objects. The principal objects were to promote and protect trade, commerce and industries and to aid their development. Advancement of trade, commerce and industry was held to promote economic prosperity and thus to serve the general public, and an object beneficial to a section of the public may still be an object of general public utility. The mere fact that members or traders may incidentally benefit does not destroy the charitable character, and the clause permitting steps to urge or oppose legislation affecting trade was only ancillary to the dominant objects. The purposes were neither vague nor merely political, and the dominant purpose was not private gain.

Conclusion: The income from the property was exempt under section 4(3)(i) because the assessee was established for charitable purposes within the meaning of advancement of an object of general public utility.

Final Conclusion: The assessee's objects were held to be charitable notwithstanding incidental benefit to its members and incidental involvement in legislative activity, so the claimed exemption succeeded and the appeals could not be sustained.

Ratio Decidendi: Advancement of trade, commerce and industry may constitute advancement of an object of general public utility, and an incidental power to support or oppose legislation does not destroy charitable character where the dominant purpose remains public utility and not private gain.

---