Define the comparison before matching
Record the client, reporting period, register version and date the external statement was obtained. Keep unmodified copies of both inputs. A comparison cannot be explained properly if the underlying files keep changing.
Agree the matching fields before reviewing differences. Party identifiers, invoice number, date and value are useful starting points. Formatting differences can obscure a possible match, but normalising data should not erase meaningful distinctions.
Use categories that lead to follow-up
Separate records found only in the books, records found only in the external statement, value differences and ambiguous potential matches. Each category needs different evidence. A missing book entry, for example, should prompt a request for the source document rather than automatic posting.
- Books-only: check period selection, source evidence and supplier follow-up.
- Statement-only: confirm the transaction belongs to the client.
- Value difference: compare the original bill and linked adjustments.
- Ambiguous match: review manually and document the decision.
Matching does not establish eligibility
A numerical match is a reconciliation observation. It does not, on its own, determine input-tax-credit eligibility or the right reporting treatment. Those conclusions depend on the applicable law and the transaction facts, which require separate professional review.
Close the working paper with resolved differences, open items and their owners. Record the source checked for any tax conclusion. AuditorBooks does not currently provide a live GSTR-2B connection or direct portal filing; this guide describes an independent review method.
For example, two similar invoice identifiers may belong to different documents. Keep both source references visible until the reviewer confirms whether the difference is formatting, duplication or a separate supply.