https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170788 A contractual mandate or pay order does not, by itself, create an equitable assignment or a present debt unless an identifiable actionable claim is irrevocably transferred. A claim for breach of the sub-lease arrangement therefore remained, at most, one for specific performance or damages and was not immediately enforceable as a debt. The Special Court could entertain the matter on the pleadings, but the sub-lease transaction was treated as void because it violated the subsisting injunction against disposal of assets. Alleged suppression did not amount to contempt on the facts, while the application was found premature and abusive, warranting exemplary costs. en-us Thu, 13 Jun 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 15 Jun 2015 15:00:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170788 A contractual mandate or pay order does not, by itself, create an equitable assignment or a present debt unless an identifiable actionable claim is irrevocably transferred. A claim for breach of the sub-lease arrangement therefore remained, at most, one for specific performance or damages and was not immediately enforceable as a debt. The Special Court could entertain the matter on the pleadings, but the sub-lease transaction was treated as void because it violated the subsisting injunction against disposal of assets. Alleged suppression did not amount to contempt on the facts, while the application was found premature and abusive, warranting exemplary costs. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 13 Jun 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170788