Section 70 permits the appropriate Government to notify a computer resource affecting Critical Information Infrastructure as a protected system. Access may be granted only to persons authorised by written order. Securing or attempting to secure access contrary to these requirements is punishable with imprisonment extending to ten years and fine. The Central Government must prescribe information security practices and procedures for protected systems.

Section 69 authorises interception, monitoring, or decryption of information through computer resources where necessary or expedient for specified public interests or offence investigation. Directions require recorded written reasons and remain subject to prescribed procedures and safeguards. Subscribers, intermediaries, and persons in charge of computer resources must provide access, technical assistance, or stored information when required. Failure to assist attracts imprisonment and fine.

Controller may direct a Certifying Authority or its employee to take specified measures or discontinue activities necessary to secure compliance with information technology law, rules, or regulations. Intentional or knowing non-compliance with such direction constitutes an offence and attracts a monetary penalty up to the prescribed limit.

Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 criminalises publishing, transmitting, or causing the publication or transmission of obscene material in electronic form. The prohibition applies to material that is lascivious, appeals to prurient interest, or tends to deprave and corrupt likely readers, viewers, or listeners. It prescribes imprisonment and fine for a first conviction, with enhanced penalties for repeat convictions.

Section 66 criminalises conduct where a person dishonestly or fraudulently commits any act covered by section 43. The offence is punishable by imprisonment, fine, or both. The terms "dishonestly" and "fraudulently" carry the meanings assigned under the Indian Penal Code.

Knowingly or intentionally concealing, destroying, altering, or causing alteration of computer source code required by law to be maintained constitutes an offence. The prohibition covers source code used for a computer, computer programme, computer system, or computer network. Computer source code includes programme listings, computer commands, design and layout, and programme analysis of a computer resource. The offence is punishable with imprisonment, fine, or both.

Unpaid penalty or compensation under the Information Technology Act, 2000 is recoverable as an arrear of land revenue. The relevant licence or electronic signature certificate remains suspended until payment of the penalty.

Section 63 permits compounding of contraventions before or after adjudication proceedings, subject to conditions and a sum not exceeding the maximum imposable penalty. Compounding is barred for the same or similar contravention committed within three years of an earlier compounded contravention, while a later contravention is treated as a first contravention. Once compounded, no proceeding or further proceeding may continue for that contravention.

An aggrieved person may appeal a decision or order of the Appellate Tribunal to the High Court within sixty days of its communication, on a question of fact or law arising from the order. Where sufficient cause prevented timely filing, the High Court may permit filing during a further period not exceeding sixty days.

Section 61 bars civil courts from entertaining suits or proceedings concerning matters that an adjudicating officer or Appellate Tribunal is empowered to determine under the statutory framework. It also prohibits courts or other authorities from granting injunctions against action taken, or proposed to be taken, pursuant to powers conferred under that framework.

Limitation for appeals made to the Appellate Tribunal is governed, as far as may be, by the Limitation Act, 1963. Its applicable provisions apply to the Tribunal's appellate process insofar as they can operate in relation to an appeal before the Tribunal.

Right to legal representation before the Appellate Tribunal permits an appellant to appear personally or authorise one or more legal practitioners or officers to present the appellant's case. The provision applies to both individual and institutional appellants.

The Appellate Tribunal is guided by natural justice rather than the procedure under the Code of Civil Procedure and may regulate its own procedure and sittings, subject to the governing Act and rules. It has civil-court powers to compel attendance, obtain documents or electronic records, receive affidavit evidence, issue commissions, review decisions, and dispose of applications by default or ex parte. Its proceedings have judicial-proceeding status and the Tribunal receives civil-court treatment for specified procedural-criminal purposes.

Section 57 provides an appellate remedy before the Appellate Tribunal against orders of the Controller or an adjudicating officer, except consent orders. Appeals must be filed within forty-five days of receiving the order, subject to condonation of delay for sufficient cause. After hearing the parties, the Appellate Tribunal may confirm, modify, or set aside the challenged order and must communicate its order to the parties and concerned officer. Appeals are to be dealt with expeditiously, with an endeavour for final disposal within six months.

Section 56 was omitted, removing the statutory framework for Central Government provision of officers and employees to the Cyber Appellate Tribunal. Before omission, personnel performed functions under the Chairperson's general superintendence, while their salaries, allowances, and service conditions were prescribed by the Central Government. The provision had replaced the reference to Presiding Officer with Chairperson.

Section 55 confers finality on Central Government orders appointing the Chairperson or a Member of the Appellate Tribunal, barring such orders from being called in question. It also prevents acts or proceedings before the Appellate Tribunal from being challenged merely on the ground of a defect in the Tribunal's constitution.

Section 54, governing resignation and removal of Cyber Appellate Tribunal officeholders, was omitted with effect from 26 May 2017. Previously, resignation required written notice to the Central Government, subject to continued office until the earliest prescribed event. Removal for proved misbehaviour or incapacity required an inquiry by a Supreme Court Judge, notice of charges, and a reasonable opportunity of hearing. The Central Government could regulate the investigation procedure by rules.

Section 53 governing vacancies in the Cyber Appellate Tribunal has been omitted. The former provision required appointment of a replacement where a non-temporary vacancy arose in the office of the Chairperson or a Member. It also permitted tribunal proceedings to continue from the stage at which the vacancy was filled.

Section 52 was omitted under the Finance Act, 2017, with effect from 26 May 2017. It no longer prescribes salary, allowances, pension, gratuity, other retirement benefits, or other service conditions for the Chairperson and Members of the Cyber Appellate Tribunal. Before its omission, these terms were required to be prescribed.

Section 51, governing the term of office and service conditions of the Chairperson and Members of the Cyber Appellate Tribunal, stands omitted with effect from 26 May 2017. The former framework prescribed a fixed tenure subject to an upper age limit, required scrutiny of financial or other interests likely to prejudice tribunal functions, and required selected Central or State Government officers to retire from government service before assuming tribunal office.