Keep a net deposit linked to its component evidence

Reconstruct the deposit's components before matching

Link the components and supporting evidence so the reviewer can explain the total without rebuilding the breakdown from scratch.

When an exception needs a supplier invoice schedule, ParseMill can extract the invoice PDFs into Excel and keep source references available for checking. That gives the reviewer a concrete starting point. Bank reconciliation, accounting judgments and posting stay in your accounting system.

The schedule is a proposed investigation aid. The authorized reviewer confirms the composition and decides how it should be recorded. A plausible arithmetic total helps test a hypothesis, but the component records must also belong to the same actual settlement or deposit.

Record the settlement boundary

Capture bank transaction reference, deposit date, amount and currency, settlement reference, included source items and evidence for each deduction. State the period or batch boundary used to select components. Without that boundary, staff can accidentally combine payments from adjacent settlements until the total happens to match.

Intuit: Bank deposits describes combining payment records into a bank deposit. Intuit: Reconcile an account describes comparing records with account statements. The proposed schedule makes the composition visible for review before any accounting action. It is especially useful where the bank presents one net amount while the supporting system presents multiple entries.

Work through a net amount

In this fictional example, three gross items and a separately documented deduction produce a candidate net deposit. The arithmetic agrees, but the reviewer still checks the settlement relationship.

If B204 is EUR 975.00, retain an unexplained EUR 5.00 residual. Do not enlarge the documented deduction to EUR 25.00 without evidence. If one payment belongs to another settlement, remove it from the candidate composition and investigate the new gap rather than selecting another convenient amount.

Keep component acceptance visible

Give each proposed component a review state and link to its source. A deposit may remain unresolved because one component lacks evidence even when the total balances. Conversely, all components may be identified while an amount difference remains. Record these as separate checks so one successful test does not conceal another failure.

• Confirm the settlement or deposit boundary.
• Preserve gross items and deductions separately.
• Check currencies before summing amounts.
• Show any residual explicitly.
• Require evidence for every accepted component relationship.

If the settlement includes refunds or adjustments, retain their event roles and supporting records. Do not flatten them into unnamed negative amounts. The reviewer needs to understand why each item contributes to the deposit, not merely see a spreadsheet formula that produces the bank total.

Verify the schedule can be traced in both directions

From the bank deposit, a colleague should find every component and deduction. From a component, they should identify which deposit uses it and whether it has been counted elsewhere. This catches double inclusion that a net-total check may miss.

Use the related workflow guide for the wider exception workflow and the workflow audit checklist to examine repeated settlement investigations. Test a known balanced example and one with an unexplained residual before relying on a proposed extraction or matching process.