No. Buying unnecessary equipment to inflate a total does not repair a weak operating model, and money spent on items the business does not need is still money gone. Direct spending at what the venture actually requires to trade and grow, then document that spending. There is no threshold figure that purchases an approval.
Order the spending from smallest question to largest
Sequence outlays so the cheapest unknowns are resolved first: nationality and ownership questions, then the cost model, then commitments that cannot be undone. Ask any adviser for an itemized scope covering eligibility review, the business plan, the application itself and later evidence requests, and ask what happens if the review identifies a problem before filing. Government charges are separate from professional fees and separate again from invested capital; confirm current amounts officially.
Add one further caution to that ordering: resist spending to reach a number someone has described as a threshold. The test is a relationship between what has been committed and what this business actually costs, so purchasing equipment a service venture does not need, or prepaying for premises beyond its requirements, adds expense without improving the position and can make the plan look less considered rather than more substantial. Spend on what the business genuinely requires and document it properly.
Hypothetical example: a founder opening a residential cleaning business is advised to buy a vehicle outright in order to raise the invested figure, and instead leases what the operation actually needs, prices the difference into working capital, and produces a plan that survives questioning better than the alternative would have.