Section 92 excludes oral agreements or statements that contradict, vary, add to, or subtract from written terms proved between parties and their representatives in interest. Evidence may nevertheless establish facts that invalidate the writing, a consistent separate agreement on a matter left silent, a condition precedent, or a distinct subsequent oral rescission or modification, subject to legal requirements of writing and registration. Usage or custom and contextual facts may also be proved where they do not conflict with express terms.

Section 91 requires contracts, grants, property dispositions, and matters legally required to be recorded in writing to be proved by the document itself or admissible secondary evidence. It applies to terms contained in one or several documents, while one original is sufficient where multiple originals exist. Oral evidence remains admissible for facts mentioned in a document that are distinct from the terms required to be proved. Specific exceptions apply to written appointments of public officers and wills admitted to probate.

Section 90A permits a discretionary presumption regarding an electronic signature on an electronic record that is at least five years old and produced from proper custody. The signature may be presumed to have been affixed by the person it purports to identify or by an authorised person. Proper custody generally means custody with the person and at the place where the record would naturally be found, while custody with a legitimate or probable origin is not improper. The custody explanation also applies to electronic records under section 81A.

Presumption for documents purporting or proved to be thirty years old permits the Court, where the document is produced from proper custody, to infer the genuineness of signatures and handwriting. In the case of executed or attested documents, the presumption may extend to due execution and attestation. Proper custody includes natural custody and also custody with a proved or probable legitimate origin.

Where a document called for is not produced after notice to produce, the Court must presume it was attested, stamped and executed in the manner required by law. This presumption concerns the formal validity of the unproduced document, including due execution and satisfaction of legal requirements relating to attestation and stamping.

Section 88A creates a discretionary presumption that an electronic message forwarded by an originator through an electronic mail server corresponds with the message entered into the computer for transmission to its purported addressee. The presumption concerns the correspondence of transmitted content only; it does not permit any presumption regarding the identity of the person who sent the message. "Originator" and "addressee" carry the meanings assigned under the Information Technology Act, 2000.

Presumption as to telegraphic messages permits the Court to presume that a message forwarded from a telegraph office to its apparent addressee corresponds with the message delivered for transmission at the stated originating office. No presumption may be drawn regarding the identity of the person who delivered the message for transmission.

Section 87 permits the Court to presume that books referred to for information on public or general interest, and published maps or charts produced for inspection where their statements are relevant facts, were written and published by the person and at the time and place each purports to have been written or published.

Input tax credit claimed in FORM GSTR-3B but absent from FORM GSTR-2A for FY 2017-18 and FY 2018-19 is to be verified where supplier reporting failures caused the mismatch. The proper officer must verify invoice possession, receipt of goods or services, payment to the supplier, required reversals, and compliance with the credit-availment time limit. Supplier tax payment requires a UDIN-backed Chartered Accountant or Cost Accountant certificate where the supplier-wise mismatch exceeds the prescribed threshold, and a supplier certificate where it does not.

Section 86 permits a court to presume that a purported certified copy of a foreign judicial record is genuine and accurate where its certification appears in a form recognised by a Central Government representative as the customary local method for certifying judicial-record copies. A Political Agent is treated as a Central Government representative for a territory or place outside India and Her Majesty's Dominions.

Electronic Signature Certificate information carries a rebuttable presumption of correctness where the certificate has been accepted by the subscriber. The court must treat information listed in the certificate as correct unless contrary proof is produced. This presumption excludes subscriber information that has not been verified, limiting the evidentiary effect to verified subscriber particulars and other listed certificate information.

Presumptions relating to secure electronic records apply in proceedings unless contrary proof is produced. A secure electronic record is presumed not to have been altered from the specific time to which its secure status relates. Secure electronic signatures are presumed to have been affixed by the subscriber with the intention of signing or approving the associated electronic record. No presumption of authenticity or integrity arises for electronic records or signatures that are not secure.

Section 85A creates a mandatory presumption for electronic agreements. Where an electronic record purports to be an agreement and contains the electronic signatures of the parties, the Court shall presume that the agreement was concluded through the affixing of those electronic signatures. The terminology was updated by replacing "digital signature" with "electronic signature."

Section 85 creates a mandatory evidentiary presumption for a document purporting to be a power of attorney when it was executed before and authenticated by a Notary Public, Court, Judge, Magistrate, Indian Consul, Vice-Consul, or a Central Government representative. In such cases, the Court must presume that the power of attorney was duly executed and authenticated.

Section 84 establishes a mandatory presumption of genuineness for books purporting to be printed or published under governmental authority and containing a country's laws. It also applies to books purporting to contain reports of decisions of that country's courts, facilitating proof of foreign laws and reported judicial decisions through such publications.

Section 83 requires the Court to presume that maps or plans purporting to have been made under the authority of the Central Government or a State Government were so made and are accurate. Maps or plans prepared for the purposes of a particular cause are excluded from this presumption and must be proved accurate.

Section 82 requires a court to presume genuine the seal, stamp, or signature on a document purporting to be admissible in England or Ireland without formal authentication. It also requires a presumption that the signatory held the claimed judicial or official character when signing. The document is admissible for the same purpose as in England or Ireland.

Section 81A requires the Court to presume the genuineness of electronic records purporting to be the Official Gazette or records required by law to be kept by a person. The presumption applies when the record is substantially maintained in the form required by law and is produced from proper custody.

Section 81 creates a mandatory presumption of genuineness for specified gazettes, newspapers, journals, and copies of United Kingdom private Acts printed by the Queen's Printer. The presumption also applies to documents legally required to be kept where they are substantially maintained in the prescribed form and produced from proper custody.

Section 80 requires a court to presume genuine a signed record or memorandum of evidence, statement, or confession produced before it. It also requires acceptance of the signatory's stated circumstances of taking and presumption that the evidence, statement, or confession was duly taken in accordance with law.