Pre-deposit requirement under VAT appeal law can be met by detained goods already secured with the Department.

The pre-deposit condition under section 62(5) of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 was treated as satisfied where the detained goods were already in the Department's custody and their value exceeded the amount required to be deposited. The reasoning was that insisting on an additional cash deposit, despite secured goods of greater value being available, would create a further liability beyond the statutory object of the appeal condition. On those facts, the detention of the goods was regarded as sufficient compliance with the pre-deposit requirement, and the appeal could proceed without insistence on the twenty-five per cent deposit.

---

---

Issues: Whether the condition of prior deposit of twenty-five per cent under section 62(5) of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 could be insisted upon for filing the appeal when the detained goods were already in the custody of the Department and their value was much higher than the amount required to be deposited.

Analysis: The appeal provision required proof of prior minimum payment of twenty-five per cent of the total tax, penalty and interest. The Court noted that the petitioner's goods had already been detained and were lying in the custody of the Department, and that their value was substantially higher than the amount that would be payable by way of pre-deposit. On those facts, insisting on an additional cash deposit would amount to imposing another liability despite the existence of valuable goods already secured with the Department. The Court treated the detention of goods as sufficient compliance with the object underlying the pre-deposit requirement.

Conclusion: The pre-deposit requirement was not to be insisted upon, and the appeal was to be entertained without deposit of twenty-five per cent.

---