Per Joginder Singh, Judicial Member. - This appeal is preferred by the assessee challenging the order of the ld. CIT(A) dated 23-1-2008 on the following grounds:—

"(i)That the order of the ld. CIT(A), Patiala is bad in law and against facts of the case.

(ii)That the order of the ld. CIT(A), Patiala is not justified in holding the scholarship/stipend received by the appellant as Salary income. He failed to appreciate the fact that amount was received by the appellant for pursuing the higher studies which he claimed as exempt under section 10(16) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

(iii)That the order of the ld. CIT(A), Patiala is erred in not applying the ratio of the judgments cited during the hearing of appeal.

(iv)The appellant craves leave to add, amend or delete any of the grounds of appeal before it is finally heard."

2. During arguments we have heard Shri Rakesh Cajla, ld. Counsel for the assessee and Shri M. S. Bhatia, ld. Sr. D.R. The contention on behalf of the assessee is that the assessee is a student of post graduation in Rajindra Medical College and received stipend/scholarship of Rs. 2,65,955 and claimed exemption from tax under section 10(16) of the Act. Our attention was a