Para 3.15.5 — MSO (Audit)
Original Rule Text
3.15.5 Orders of allotment of funds and re-appropriation orders received in Audit should be scrutinised to ensure that:
(a) these have been issued by an authority competent to do so;
(b) the allotments made are not in excess of the amounts authorised under the relevant Grant or Appropriation;
(c) the amount appropriated is available under the unit from which it is allotted;
(d) amounts re-appropriated are not intended for meeting expenditure on a ‘New Service’ or a ‘New Instrument of Service’;
(e) no amount has been re-appropriated from one Grant or Appropriation to another Grant or Appropriation;
(f) no amount has been re-appropriated from the ‘Charged’ Section to the ‘Voted’ Section and vice versa;
(g) no amount has been re-appropriated from Revenue to Capital and vice versa; and
(h) funds provided under ‘Plan’ heads have not been re-appropriated to ‘NonPlan’ heads without the previous consent of the Finance Ministry/ Department.
# Review of variations
What This Means
When fund allotment and re-appropriation orders are received in audit, they must be scrutinised against eight specific checks: the issuing authority must be competent, allotments must not exceed the Grant, the source unit must have available funds, re-appropriations must not fund 'New Services', funds cannot be moved between Grants or between Charged and Voted sections or between Revenue and Capital, and Plan funds cannot be shifted to Non-Plan without Finance Ministry consent.
This explanation was generated with AI assistance for educational purposes. Always refer to the official gazette notification for authoritative text.
Key Points
- 1Re-appropriation orders must be from a competent authority
- 2Allotments must not exceed the total amount authorised under the Grant or Appropriation
- 3The source unit must have sufficient available balance for re-appropriation
- 4Re-appropriation cannot fund 'New Service' or 'New Instrument of Service'
- 5No transfer between Grants, between Charged and Voted sections, or between Revenue and Capital
Practical Example
A department issues a re-appropriation order shifting Rs 5 crore from 'Office Equipment' (Revenue) to 'Building Construction' (Capital) within the same Grant. The auditor rejects this because re-appropriation from Revenue to Capital is prohibited under clause (g). The department must instead seek a supplementary Grant for the capital expenditure. Similarly, if the department tries to use savings from a Plan scheme to fund Non-Plan salaries, this requires prior Finance Ministry consent under clause (h).
This explanation was generated with AI assistance for educational purposes. Always refer to the official gazette notification for authoritative text.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a 'New Service' or 'New Instrument of Service'?▼
What is the difference between Charged and Voted expenditure?▼
Why is consent of the Finance Ministry needed for Plan to Non-Plan re-appropriation?▼
This explanation was generated with AI assistance for educational purposes. Always refer to the official gazette notification for authoritative text.