Ground No. 1 relates to addition of Rs. 1,51,988 by denying the indexation on cost of acquisition as documents in respect of landcould not be producedwhile computing the long-term capital gains On perusal of the orders of the authorities below suggests that the cost of acquisition of Rs. 4,19,533 has been admitted and the long term capital gain has also been accepted. Therefore, the benefit of statutory indexation cost to offset the effect of inflation cannot be denied. Once the cost of acquisition is determined and the land under sale was found to be a long-term capital asset, indexation of cost of acquisition becomes automatic as per the statutory provisions of the Act. Therefore, we do not find any rationale for denial of indexation benefits. Therefore, the aforesaid addition of Rs. 1,51,988 arising on account of such denial requires to be reversed. The AO is directed to delete the addition on this score. Ground No. 2 concerns treatment of capital receipt claim as revenue income by the AO. after there is a breach of contract for sale of goods, nothing is left in the injured party save the right to sue for damages or specific performance which cannot be transferred under s. 6(e) of the Transfer of Property Act since it is a mere right to sue and not an actionable claim." In view of the above facts and in the light of plethora of case law relied upon, we are disposed to hold that the receipt towards compensation in lieu of ‘right to sue’ is of capital nature which is not chargeable to tax under s. 45 of the Act.