Making digital signature technology neutral Defining reasonable security practices to be followed by corporate Redefining the role of intermediaries Recognizing the role of Indian Computer Emergency Response Team Inclusion of some additional cyber crimes like child pornography and cyber terrorism Authorizing an Inspector to investigate cyber offenses as against the DSP earlier Structure of IT Act How is IT Act structured? The Act totally has 13 chapters and 90 sections. The Act has chapters that deal with authentication of electronic records, electronic signatures etc.
Content[ edit ] The Controlled Substances Act consists of 2 subchapters. Subchapter I defines Schedules I-V, lists chemicals used in the manufacture of controlled substances, and differentiates lawful and unlawful manufacturing, distribution, and possession It act 2000 controlled substances, including possession of Schedule I drugs for personal use; this subchapter also specifies the dollar amounts of fines and durations of prison terms for violations.
Subchapter II describes the laws for exportation and importation of controlled substances, again specifying fines and prison terms for violations. When a petition is received by the DEA, the agency begins its own investigation of the drug.
The DEA also may begin an investigation of a drug at any time based upon information received from laboratories, state and local law enforcement and regulatory agencies, or other sources of information.
Then, HHS solicits information from the Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration and evaluations and recommendations from the National Institute on Drug Abuse and, on occasion, from the scientific and medical community at large.
The Assistant Secretary, by authority of the Secretary, compiles the information and transmits back to the DEA a medical and scientific evaluation regarding the drug or other substance, a recommendation as to whether the drug should be controlled, and in what schedule it should be placed.
The HHS recommendation on scheduling is binding to the extent that if HHS recommends, based on its medical and scientific evaluation, that the substance not be controlled, then the DEA may not control the substance.
Once the DEA has received the scientific and medical It act 2000 from HHS, the DEA Administrator evaluates all available data and makes a final decision whether to propose that a drug or other substance be controlled and into which schedule it should be placed.
Under certain circumstances, the Government may temporarily schedule  a drug without following the normal procedure. An example is when international treaties require control of a substance. In addition, 21 U.
Thirty days' notice is required before the order can be issued, and the scheduling expires after a year; however, the period may be extended six months if rulemaking proceedings to permanently schedule the drug are in progress.
In any case, once these proceedings are complete, the temporary order is automatically vacated.
Unlike ordinary scheduling proceedings, such temporary orders are not subject to judicial review. The CSA also creates a closed system of distribution  for those authorized to handle controlled substances.
The cornerstone of this system is the registration of all those authorized by the DEA to handle controlled substances. All individuals and firms that are registered are required to maintain complete and accurate inventories and records of all transactions involving controlled substances, as well as security for the storage of controlled substances.
The CSA bears many resemblances to these Conventions. Both the CSA and the treaties set out a system for classifying controlled substances in several Schedules in accordance with the binding scientific and medical findings of a public health authority. The domestic and international legal nature of these treaty obligations must be considered in light of the supremacy of the United States Constitution over treaties or acts and the equality of treaties and Congressional acts.
Covert the Supreme Court of the United States addressed both these issues directly and clearly holding: Nor is there anything in the debates which accompanied the drafting and ratification of the Constitution which even suggests such a result.
These debates, as well as the history that surrounds the adoption of the treaty provision in Article VI, make it clear that the reason treaties were not limited to those made in "pursuance" of the Constitution was so that agreements made by the United States under the Articles of Confederation, including the important peace treaties which concluded the Revolutionary War, would remain in effect.
It would be manifestly contrary to the objectives of those who created the Constitution, as well as those who were responsible for the Bill of Rights—let alone alien to our entire constitutional history and tradition—to construe Article VI as permitting the United States to exercise power under an international agreement without observing constitutional prohibitions.
In effect, such construction would permit amendment of that document in a manner not sanctioned by Article V. The prohibitions of the Constitution were designed to apply to all branches of the National Government, and they cannot be nullified by the Executive or by the Executive and the Senate combined.
There is nothing new or unique about what we say here. This Court has regularly and uniformly recognized the supremacy of the Constitution over a treaty. For example, in Geofroy v. It would not be contended that it extends so far as to authorize what the Constitution forbids, or a change in the character of the government, or in that of one of the States, or a cession of any portion of the territory of the latter, without its consent.
It would be completely anomalous to say that a treaty need not comply with the Constitution when such an agreement can be overridden by a statute that must conform to that instrument.
Congress and the President of the United States have the absolute sovereign right to withdraw from or abrogate at any time these two instruments, in accordance with said nation's Constitutionat which point these treaties will cease to bind that nation in any way, shape, or form.NOTE - The FARSite is the authoritative source for the AFFARS only.
The FARSite is only an electronic representation of the FAR and the other supplements. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of is mandatory. ALL organizations, large and small, MUST comply.
This website is intended to assist and guide. the information technology act, / chapter x. the cyber appellate tribunal tpr 3rdr rafera amended videita) (section 57 appeal to cyber regulations appellate tribunal 58 procedure and powers of the cyber appellate tribunal 59 right to legal representation fat tfafafera t .
This case is still under investigation. Case No/ is under Section 66 of the IT Act, In this complaint the complainant complained that some unknown accused person gained access without permission to the computer system of HDFC Bank and purchased tickets for travel worth Rs,/-.
This case is still under investigation. The Civil Rights Act of (Pub.L.
88–, 78 Stat. , enacted July 2, ) is a landmark civil rights and US labor law in the United States that outlaws discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. It prohibits unequal application of voter registration requirements, racial segregation in schools, employment, and public accommodations.
Provisions of IT Act The IT Act of passed in a budget session of parliament and signed by President K.R. Narayanan in It underwent further finalization by India’s Minister of Information Technology, Pramod Mahajan.
The original act addressed electronic documents, e-signatures, and authentication of those records.