Advanced Search Options : ❯
Section 67A of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Indian Laws - Acts
Section 67A requires proof that an alleged electronic signature affixed to an electronic record belongs to the stated subscriber, except where it is a secure electronic signature. It establishes an evidentiary authentication requirement for ordinary electronic signatures while preserving distinct treatment for secure electronic signatures.
Section 67 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Indian Laws - Acts
Section 67 requires proof of a person's signature or handwriting where a document is alleged to have been signed or written, wholly or partly, by that person. The party relying on the allegation must establish that the disputed signature or relevant handwriting is genuinely attributable to the alleged signer or writer.
Section 66 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Indian Laws - Acts
Secondary evidence of a document's contents generally requires prior notice to produce the original to the party having possession or power over it, or to that party's attorney or pleader. Where no notice is legally prescribed, the Court may require reasonable notice. Notice may be dispensed with where the document is itself a notice, production is evidently required, the original was obtained by fraud or force, is in Court, its loss is admitted, or its holder is beyond the Court's process.
Revisionary jurisdiction fails where cash deposits were assessed in the charitable trust's hands and the individual assessment was justified.
Revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 requires an assessment order to be both erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. Cash deposits attributed to an individual were supported by a bank certificate showing incorrect PAN updating and were considered in the charitable trust's assessment, including an addition for the same cash. Non-addition in the individual's assessment was therefore justified, so the conditions for revision were not met and the revision order was set aside.
Representative sampling in commercial-quantity narcotics prosecutions can support bail where combined samples undermine chemical-analysis reliability.
Representative sampling is material to the statutory bail threshold for commercial-quantity narcotics offences. Combining two slabs of charas before drawing representative samples may make the sample sent for chemical analysis non-representative, providing a prima facie basis to overcome the restrictions on bail under the NDPS Act. Prolonged custody, completion of investigation, filing of the charge-sheet, absence of criminal antecedents, and no apparent flight risk or risk of repeat offending further support conditional release. On these factors, the statutory threshold for bail was considered satisfied.
Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Indian Laws - Acts
Electronic records in computer-output form may be treated as documents and admitted without original production when prescribed reliability conditions are met. The computer must have been regularly used under lawful control; relevant data must have been regularly entered in the ordinary course; operational failures must not affect accuracy; and the output must reproduce or derive from that data. A certificate identifying the record and production process, giving appropriate device particulars, and addressing these conditions may be signed by a responsible official.
Section 65A of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Indian Laws - Acts
Electronic records are subject to a special evidentiary framework for proving their contents under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Section 65A directs that the contents of an electronic record may be proved in accordance with Section 65B. Section 65B is identified as the governing route for proof of electronic-record contents within documentary evidence.
Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Indian Laws - Acts
Secondary evidence may be admitted where an original is unavailable after required notice, has been lost or destroyed without fault, cannot readily be moved, or where its contents are admitted in writing. The admissible form varies by circumstance: written admissions are admissible for admitted contents; only certified copies may prove public documents or documents legally provable by certified copy; and a skilled examiner may prove the general result of numerous documents that cannot conveniently be examined.
National Assessment Centre Portal operates as a public digital repository supporting uniform and consistent Customs assessment under the Faceless Assessment framework. It provides searchable access to audit objections, advance rulings, judicial and quasi-judicial decisions, meeting records, advisories, alerts, circulars, and classification, valuation, and policy-related material. Importers, Customs brokers, and trade stakeholders may use these resources to obtain assessment references, support informed compliance, and reduce divergent practices. Authenticated departmental users have role-based functions to upload and manage assessment reports, policy references, audit objections, investigations, rulings, legal decisions, meeting records, no.....
Section 64 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Indian Laws - Acts
Section 64 establishes the general evidentiary rule governing proof of documentary evidence: documents must ordinarily be proved through primary evidence. Departure from that requirement is permissible only in subsequently specified cases. Primary evidence remains the ordinary and mandatory mode for establishing documentary contents, while alternative forms of proof are confined exclusively to recognised exceptions in legally specified evidentiary circumstances.
Section 63 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Indian Laws - Acts
Secondary evidence in documentary proof includes certified copies; copies produced through mechanical processes that inherently assure accuracy and copies compared with them; copies made from or compared with an original; counterparts relied on against parties who did not execute them; and oral accounts of document contents by a person who has personally seen the document.
Permission for a customs freight station to handle international transshipment of less-than-container-load containers and related operations is renewed for a further two years, up to 10 September 2028. The facility must comply with prescribed conditions and procedures under the applicable customs circulars, public notices, the Handling of Cargo in Customs Area Regulations, 2009, and the Customs Act, 1962. Any lapse in compliance may result in withdrawal of the permission without further notice.
Proper officers must verify applicable licences, permissions, registration certificates and other prescribed particulars against the relevant CDSCO checklist before granting Out-of-Charge for PGA-facilitated imports of cosmetics, drugs and medical devices. Importers, Customs Brokers and other stakeholders must upload mandatory compliance documents on e-SANCHIT to support expedited clearance. The verification requirement applies to the seven product categories covered by the prescribed checklists and takes effect immediately.
ICD-bound containers selected for scanning may be scanned at a Mobile Scanner regardless of their original allocation to a Drive Through Scanner, without further permission from the Container Scanning Division. Port Terminal Operators must ensure scanning before onward movement: containers from BMCT may use the nearest Mobile Scanner or DTCS02, while other terminals must use the designated Mobile Scanners. Containers reported clean are released under prescribed Customs procedures; suspicious containers must move to the nominated CFS for 100% examination. Operators must maintain records and submit consolidated weekly scanning reports each Monday. The arrangement takes immediate effect.
NDPS bail restrictions may not preclude release where sampling concerns, prolonged custody, and statutory conditions support bail.
NDPS Act bail restrictions under Section 37 need not preclude release where alleged contraband from multiple bags was mixed before representative sampling, creating a prima facie concern over sampling validity. Prolonged custody, completion of the investigation and charge-sheet, an unlikely early trial, absence of criminal antecedents, and no material suggesting further offending or absconding support satisfaction of the statutory bail conditions. These factors collectively support release on bail despite the restrictions under Section 37.
Filing deadlines for electronic PGIRP-1 to PGIRP-6 forms monitoring insolvency resolution processes of personal guarantors to corporate debtors are extended until 31 December 2026. The extension applies to all applicable forms required through the e-platform. Penalties for delayed submission or modification of these forms will be levied only after 31 December 2026, allowing additional time for compliance during the transition.
Section 62 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Indian Laws - Acts
Primary evidence consists of the document itself produced for the court's inspection. Each part of a document executed in several parts is primary evidence, and each executed counterpart is primary evidence against its executing parties. Documents produced through one uniform process, such as printing, lithography or photography, are primary evidence of each other's contents. Copies made from a common original, however, are not primary evidence of that original's contents.
Section 61 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Indian Laws - Acts
Proof of the contents of documents may be established by either primary evidence or secondary evidence. Both forms are recognised as permissible evidentiary means for demonstrating what a document contains. Documentary contents may therefore be proved through primary evidence, or alternatively through secondary evidence, for use in legal proceedings.
Section 60 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Indian Laws - Acts
Direct oral evidence must be given by a witness with firsthand knowledge of the fact asserted. Facts capable of being seen, heard, or otherwise perceived must be proved by the person who directly perceived them, while opinion evidence must come from the person holding that opinion. Expert treatises may prove expert opinions in specified circumstances of the author's unavailability. The court may require a material object, other than a document, to be produced for inspection.
Section 59 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Indian Laws - Acts
Proof of facts may be established through oral evidence, subject to the exclusion of the contents of documents or electronic records. Oral testimony is available to prove facts generally, but it does not serve as the mode for proving documentary or electronic-record contents.