Para 3.1.20 — MSO

Issues for audit scrutiny Audit of Vouchers 3.1.20 Adherence to the following requirements should be verified in the course of detailed audit of vouchers in support of payments:

(i) The vouchers should be in the prescribed form, in original and duly acknowledged by the payees in token of receipt. A brief abstract should be included in the authorised official language under the signature of the drawing officer on all vouchers prepared in any other language, and the signatures, if not in the authorised script, should be transliterated. Subvouchers, if any, should contain notes of the dates of payment.

(ii) Vouchers should be numbered with reference to the Schedule of List of Payments, Schedule Dockets or other accounts, as the case may be.

(iii) Individual amounts detailed in the vouchers should add up to the totals and the totals indicated both in words and in figures.

(iv) The vouchers should bear a pay order signed by the Treasury Officer where the vouchers are encashed at treasuries, or by the concerned disbursing officer in other cases. In particular, in cases where the payment is made at a bank, the voucher should contain the pay order of the authorised Government Officer, where required under the rules.

(v) Stamps bearing the legend ‘Paid’ should have been affixed on the vouchers.

(vi) There should be no erasures on the vouchers and the officer concerned should have attested individually all corrections and alterations on every occasion that they were made.

(vii) Unless otherwise provided in the rules of Government, stamps should have been affixed to all vouchers involving a net payment in excess of Rs.500, the stamps being punched.

Note: In respect of payments made in Embassies, Missions, etc. abroad, Audit will not insist upon the production of receipts if a cash voucher is available or, when payment has been made by cheque, an acknowledgement of its receipt has been obtained from the payee.

(viii) No payment should have been made on a voucher or order signed by a subordinate instead of the head of the office himself or on a voucher or order on which only a facsimile signature has been stamped/affixed. The sanctioning authority officer or a gazetted Government servant duly authorised for the purpose should have also certified all copies of sanctions.

Note: A separate sanction need not be insisted upon in respect of charges for which a special sanction is necessary under the rules if the bill or voucher on which the money is drawn is signed or countersigned, either before or after the money is drawn, by the authority competent to sanction the expenditure. However, charges of the kind in question may not be included in the same bill along with other items for which a special sanction is not necessary.

(ix) Wherever prescribed, agreement should have been effected between two different documents.

Note: The auditor should also note, under his initials, on both the documents the fact of such agreement having been effected.

(x) A treasury voucher paid by transfer should be stamped as having been so paid; the head of account to which it has been credited should also have been noted on the voucher.

Note: In the course of audit, the relevant credit should be traced in the Cash Account whenever possible.

(xi) Deductions on account of subscriptions to Provident Fund and Income Tax should have been made wherever applicable.

Note: The Audit officer is not responsible for checking the correctness of the income tax deductions in individual bills. However, whenever such bills are subjected to his scrutiny in the course of audit, he should always verify that deductions on account of income tax have not been overlooked in cases where these should clearly have been made.

(xii) No bills pertaining to pay or any allowance not claimed within one year of its becoming due (or such other period as may be prescribed in this behalf) should have been admitted for payment without the sanction of the Accountant General (A & E) in cases where the rules of the Government so prescribe.

(xiii) Stores should have been purchased through the purchase organisation of the Ministry of Supply of the Central Government when this is required by the orders of the Government and payment for such stores should have also been made by that Ministry’s Pay and Accounts Office, except when the amount involved is less than a rupee. Further, Audit should specifically ensure the following:

(i) Payments of money by transfer (commonly known as Nil Payment Vouchers) from the Consolidated Fund to the Public Account (Deposit Heads, Zilla Parshad or Panchayat accounts, etc.) should be scrupulously audited and reviewed every month and receipt of a certificate that this has been done watched by the Central Audit Support Sections. After scrutiny of such Nil Payment Vouchers, these Sections should furnish a consolidated report every month to the Report Section detailing such Nil Payments effected during the month.

(ii) The classification indicated in the voucher is correct and compares with the classification of the charge as mentioned in the approved budget.

(iii) All purchases made on proforma invoices and where the materials have not been received and taken to stock should be audited in detail. Central Audit Parties should furnish details of such purchases to the Central Audit Support Sections for further follow up action. Notes:

(i) The term ‘voucher’ should be taken also to include ‘sub-voucher’ for all purposes of audit.

(ii) Cash memoranda issued by tradesmen for sales against cash payment should not be regarded as sub-vouchers unless they contain an acknowledgement of