Central Government orders appointing the Chairperson or a Member of an Appellate Tribunal cannot be challenged. Acts and proceedings before an Appellate Tribunal cannot be questioned merely because of a defect in the tribunal's constitution, preserving the validity and continuity of appellate proceedings.

Section 54 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, concerning resignation and removal in relation to the Appellate Tribunal, stands omitted. It contains no continuing substantive rules, procedure, eligibility condition, removal mechanism, or consequence concerning resignation or removal. The provision is represented only by an omission marker and has no operative text in its present form.

Section 53, dealing with filling vacancies in the Appellate Tribunal, is omitted from the Information Technology Act, 2000. No vacancy-filling procedure, eligibility criterion, appointment mechanism, consequential arrangement, or separate replacement mechanism is set out within this provision. The legal effect is confined to removal of the former statutory provision governing Appellate Tribunal vacancies.

Section 52, concerning salary, allowances and other service conditions of the Appellate Tribunal Chairperson and Members, is omitted. No operative provision remains concerning remuneration, allowances, or service conditions for those office-holders, and no governing rule, condition, or procedure is specified under this heading in relation to the stated employment terms.

Section 51 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, concerning the term of office and conditions of service of the Chairperson and Members of the Appellate Tribunal, stands omitted.

Qualifications for appointment as Chairperson and Members of the Cyber Appellate Tribunal are omitted. The provision contains no operative eligibility criteria, appointment conditions, or qualification standards for those offices, as its text has been removed. No additional substantive requirement or replacement framework is set out.

Section 49 governing the composition of the Cyber Appellate Tribunal was omitted with effect from 26 May 2017. Before omission, it required the Tribunal to consist of one person, identified as the Residing Officer, appointed by the Central Government through notification, thereby establishing a single-member appellate tribunal and central-notification appointment mechanism.

The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal is designated as the Appellate Tribunal for purposes of the Information Technology Act, 2000. It exercises the jurisdiction, powers and authority conferred under that Act. The Central Government may notify the matters and places in relation to which the Tribunal may exercise jurisdiction.

Compensation quantum under the Information Technology Act, 2000 is adjudged by the adjudicating officer with due regard to quantifiable gain or unfair advantage from the default, loss caused to any person by the default, and the repetitive nature of the default. These factors guide assessment of compensation within the penalties, compensation and adjudication framework.

Adjudicating officers appointed by the Central Government determine Information Technology Act contraventions involving penalties or compensation. They may adjudicate damage claims within the prescribed monetary jurisdiction, while larger claims lie before the competent court. The affected person must receive a reasonable opportunity to make a representation before an inquiry leads to a penalty or compensation award. Officers require prescribed technical and legal or judicial experience and exercise specified civil court powers, with proceedings treated as judicial proceedings.

Section 45 creates a residuary penalty for contravention of rules, regulations, directions or orders where no separate penalty is prescribed. The contravener is liable for a penalty up to one lakh rupees, in addition to compensation payable to the affected person. Higher compensation applies to an intermediary, company or body corporate than to any other person.

Civil penalties apply for failure to furnish required documents, returns or reports to the Controller or a Certifying Authority. Defaults in filing returns or furnishing prescribed information, books or documents within regulatory time limits may attract daily penalties while the failure continues. Failure to maintain required books of account or records may also attract a daily penalty for the continuing period of non-compliance.

Section 43 establishes compensatory liability for unauthorised access, data extraction, introduction of contaminants or viruses, damage, disruption, denial of authorised access, account manipulation, information interference, and source-code tampering intended to cause damage. Damages by way of compensation are payable to the affected person. Computer contaminants and viruses include harmful instructions affecting data, programmes or normal computer operations, while damage includes destruction, alteration, deletion, addition, modification or rearrangement of a computer resource.

Section 42 requires every subscriber to exercise reasonable care in retaining control of the private key corresponding to the public key in the Digital Signature Certificate and to prevent its disclosure. If the private key is compromised, the subscriber must communicate the compromise without delay in the prescribed manner. Liability continues until the compromise is communicated.

Acceptance of a Digital Signature Certificate is deemed where a subscriber publishes or authorises its publication, including through a repository, or otherwise demonstrates approval. By accepting it, the subscriber certifies to reasonable relying parties that the subscriber holds and is entitled to hold the corresponding private key, that representations and material information given to the Certifying Authority are true, and that certificate information within the subscriber's knowledge is true.

A subscriber accepting a Digital Signature Certificate containing a public key corresponding to the subscriber's private key must generate the corresponding public-private key pair by applying the applicable security procedure. This requirement ensures that the key pair recorded through the certificate is created in accordance with required security safeguards.

Suspension or revocation of a Digital Signature Certificate requires the Certifying Authority to publish notice in the repository identified in the certificate. If more than one repository is specified, publication is mandatory in every designated repository, ensuring notification of the certificate's status through each specified repository.

Revocation of a Digital Signature Certificate may occur on the subscriber's request, death, insolvency, or the dissolution or winding up of a subscribing firm or company. It may also be based on false or concealed material facts, unmet issuance requirements, or a security compromise materially affecting certificate reliability. The subscriber must be given an opportunity to be heard before revocation, and the Certifying Authority must communicate the revocation to the subscriber.

Suspension of a Digital Signature Certificate may occur on the request of the listed subscriber or a duly authorised representative, or where required in the public interest. Suspension cannot continue beyond fifteen days unless the subscriber has been given an opportunity to be heard. The subscriber must be informed once suspension occurs.

Issuance of a Digital Signature Certificate requires certification of legal compliance, subscriber acceptance, availability of the certificate to relying persons, and the subscriber's control of the corresponding private key. The private key must create a digital signature, the public key must verify it, and both must form a functioning key pair. Certificate information must be accurate, and no known material fact may undermine the reliability of these representations.