Literal interpretation of pre-deposit proviso: revision cannot be conditioned on both tax and penalty deposits where the statute uses alternatives.

The proviso to section 70(2) of the Tripura Value Added Tax Act, 2004 was construed literally: the words "fifty per cent of the tax assessed" and "fifty per cent of the penalty levied" are disjunctive, so deposit of both amounts cannot be insisted upon. The required pre-deposit depends on the nature of the impugned order, meaning only the relevant alternative applies where the revision concerns assessment of tax or imposition of penalty. The order insisting on both deposits was set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether, for admission of a revision petition under the proviso to section 70(2) of the Tripura Value Added Tax Act, 2004, the dealer or transporter was required to deposit both fifty per cent of the tax assessed and fifty per cent of the penalty levied, or only one of them depending on the nature of the impugned order.

Analysis: The proviso uses the words "or" between the expressions relating to payment of fifty per cent of the tax assessed and fifty per cent of the penalty levied. The language was held to be plain and unambiguous, and the words were required to be read disjunctively according to their ordinary meaning. No additional words could be read into the proviso to compel deposit of both amounts when the statute itself provided alternatives. Applying the rule of literal construction, the condition for admission of revision depended on whether the order related to assessment of tax or imposition of penalty.

Conclusion: The petitioner was not required to deposit both fifty per cent of the tax assessed and fifty per cent of the penalty levied. The impugned order requiring both deposits was and was set aside.

---