Para 3.1.20 — MSO (Audit)
Original Rule Text
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.
What This Means
This is a comprehensive checklist of requirements for auditing payment vouchers during central audit. It covers 13 main areas including: voucher format and payee acknowledgement, proper numbering, arithmetic accuracy, pay orders from authorized officers, 'Paid' stamps, no erasures (only attested corrections), revenue stamps on payments over Rs 500, prohibition of facsimile signatures, agreement between related documents, transfer payment markings, PF and income tax deductions, time-barred claims, and procurement through authorized channels. Additional checks cover nil payment vouchers, classification accuracy, and proforma invoice purchases.
This explanation was generated with AI assistance for educational purposes. Always refer to the official gazette notification for authoritative text.
Key Points
- 1Vouchers must be in prescribed form, original, signed by authorized officers (no facsimile), and acknowledged by payees
- 2Arithmetic accuracy, proper numbering, revenue stamps (>Rs 500), and no unattested erasures must be verified
- 3Nil payment vouchers and proforma invoice purchases require special detailed audit
- 4Classification on vouchers must match the approved budget head
- 5PF subscriptions, income tax deductions, and time-barred claim restrictions must be checked
Practical Example
During central audit, an auditor picks up a voucher for Rs 3,50,000 paid to a contractor. She checks: the voucher is on the prescribed Form-65 (format check), the contractor's signature is on it (payee acknowledgement), the individual line items add to Rs 3,50,000 (arithmetic), the Treasury Officer has signed the pay order (authorization), a 'Paid' stamp is affixed, revenue stamp is present and punched, classification is under Major Head 4059-Capital Outlay on Public Works (matches budget), and TDS has been deducted. She finds that a Rs 15,000 correction was made but not attested — this becomes an audit observation.
This explanation was generated with AI assistance for educational purposes. Always refer to the official gazette notification for authoritative text.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why are facsimile (rubber stamp) signatures prohibited?▼
What is a 'nil payment voucher'?▼
Why must proforma invoice purchases be audited in detail?▼
This explanation was generated with AI assistance for educational purposes. Always refer to the official gazette notification for authoritative text.