Para 3.23.22 — MSO (Audit)
Original Rule Text
3.23.22 Whenever expenditure is not identifiable for the purpose of certification, as much information as may be available in the accounts records of the Accountant General (A&E) should be furnished leaving it to the Ministry of Finance to call for such further information as may be necessary from the State/Union Territory Governments for finalisation of the Central assistance. The following procedure may be adopted in such cases:
(i) If details of the break-up of expenditure under State Plan schemes, Central Plan schemes and Centrally Sponsored schemes are separately available in the Finance and detailed Appropriation Accounts, these may be furnished along with scheme-wise details to the extent available; otherwise, the total plan expenditure under each minor head may be furnished supported by scheme-wise details to the extent available.
(ii) Loans and grants given to local bodies and autonomous bodies may be treated as final expenditure.
(iii) Amounts held under objection on account of non-availability of detailed bills or utilisation certificates may be excluded from the audited figures of expenditure if it is possible to relate them to a particular scheme or category of schemes; otherwise, the certificate may be qualified to indicate that the scheme-wise breakdown of amounts held under objection is not available and that these details are being obtained from the departmental officers.
(iv) In cases where any scheme has been comprehensively reviewed in audit, attention may be drawn to the relevant paragraphs/review in the Audit Report so that the Central Government can take the irregularities mentioned therein into account at the time of final adjustment of the assistance.
What This Means
When expenditure cannot be clearly identified or segregated by scheme type for certification purposes, the auditor should furnish whatever information is available from the AG (A&E) records and leave it to the Finance Ministry to obtain further details from the state government. Specific procedures are prescribed for handling plan versus non-plan breakdowns, treating grants to local bodies as final expenditure, excluding objected amounts, and cross-referencing audit reviews.
This explanation was generated with AI assistance for educational purposes. Always refer to the official gazette notification for authoritative text.
Key Points
- 1When expenditure is not identifiable, available information should still be furnished
- 2Finance Ministry obtains further details from state/UT governments
- 3Scheme-wise breakdowns from Appropriation Accounts should be used where available
- 4Loans and grants to local/autonomous bodies are treated as final expenditure
- 5Objected amounts are excluded if linkable to specific schemes; otherwise the certificate is qualified
- 6Relevant Audit Report paragraphs should be referenced for comprehensively reviewed schemes
Practical Example
In a state where expenditure on 30 plan schemes is booked under a single minor head without scheme-wise breakup, the auditor certifies the total plan expenditure under that head and provides whatever scheme-wise details are available from AG records. A note is added that the detailed breakdown is being obtained from departmental officers, and the Finance Ministry is left to finalise the scheme-wise allocation with the state government.
This explanation was generated with AI assistance for educational purposes. Always refer to the official gazette notification for authoritative text.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why would expenditure not be identifiable?▼
Why are grants to local bodies treated as final expenditure?▼
This explanation was generated with AI assistance for educational purposes. Always refer to the official gazette notification for authoritative text.