A PIL was filed challenging the constitutional validity of Explanation (v) to section 10(26AAA) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as amended by the Finance Act, 2023. The amendment expanded the definition of ‘Sikkimese’ to include individuals not domiciled in Sikkim before 26.04.1975, based on familial connections. The petitioner argued that this violated Article 371F(k), which protects the rights of the indigenous Sikkimese. The Court dismissed the PIL, stating the amendment followed the Supreme Court’s directive in Association of Old Settlers of Sikkim v. Union of India. The Court clarified that the definition of ‘Sikkimese’ pertains only to taxation and does not affect the rights of indigenous Sikkimese under the Constitution. High Court held that the PIL was not justifiable. On SLP the Court observed that  the expression “Sikkimese” was expanded only for the purpose of grant of benefit to such persons who came within the scope of the Explanation to section 10(26AAA) of the Act and not for any other purposes as such. The Union of India may also issue a formal notification with regard to what has been stated in the press release, if not already so issued. SLP of assessee dismissed.