AI-assisted internal-audit fieldwork for Indian enterprises. Explore a worked example of a procedure, its sources and the decisions that stay with your team.
Select a step. Inspect the evidence. Keep the conclusion in human hands.
Interactive example · synthetic data. Representative interface, not a product capture.
Documents / DEMO-0042
Give each source a role.
The invoice is primary evidence; the approved purchase order is the amount authority. An ERP payment export defines the population. Goods receipts support the procedure, reference data supplies mappings, and the synthetic procurement policy defines the criteria.
DEMO-0042.pdf
Primary evidence · page 1 · v1
purchase-orders.xlsx
Source of truth · Orders!H43 · v1
ERP payment export
Population · illustrative input v1
Goods-receipt rows
Supporting evidence · illustrative input v1
Supplier / PO mappings
Reference data · illustrative input v1
Synthetic Procurement Policy v3 · §4.2
Policy/regulation · effective 1 April 2026
Tests / DEMO-0042
Define the procedure before the Run.
The Audit Test Recipe holds Extract, Reconcile and Checks. Match on the PO reference; compare invoice subtotal with the approved PO amount using a ₹1 tolerance and Synthetic Procurement Policy v3 §4.2. Recipe v3 is approved only within this illustration; conclusions still require human review.
P2P amount check · v3
Compare invoice subtotal with approved PO amount. Absolute difference must not exceed ₹1. If the approved PO is unavailable, report Insufficient evidence.
Matching key
PO reference · PO-0042
Approval
Approved in illustration
Result review
Awaiting reviewer confirmation
Runs / DEMO-0042
One execution. A retained snapshot.
DEMO-RUN-018 uses Recipe v3 and input versions v1. Of 200 received records, 10 are excluded and 190 eligible. Execution completes for 180; 6 await evidence and 4 have processing errors. In the product model, completed Run history is immutable; new versions do not rewrite earlier work.
DEMO-RUN-018
Version snapshot
Recipe v3 · inputs v1
Execution context
Engine demo-1 · model fixture-1 Illustrative identifiers
Completed
180 of 190 eligible records
Review
Awaiting reviewer confirmation
Interactive example · synthetic data
P2P — Q1 FY27DEMO-RUN-018 · Recipe v3
Result / DEMO-0042
Fail
The amounts don’t match.
Amount mismatch. The invoice subtotal exceeds the approved purchase order by ₹5,000; tolerance ₹1.
Expected · approved PO
₹1,20,000
Actual · invoice subtotal
₹1,25,000
Difference
₹5,000
Awaiting reviewer confirmation. Selecting an example does not approve a result.
Representative interface. Invented evidence and policy; no live audit execution.
Findings / DEMO-0042
An exception is not yet a finding.
A finding groups related confirmed exceptions into an audit issue with criteria, condition, cause, impact, recommendation and sign-offs. DEMO-0042 remains unconfirmed: no finding has been raised and there are zero related confirmed exceptions in this illustration.
Finding / Not raised
0 confirmed exceptions
Related record: DEMO-0042 · Amount mismatch · confirmation outstanding.
These are the fields a reviewer would develop after confirming related exceptions. They are not a finding from this Run.
Working Papers / DEMO-0042
Carry the reasoning into the review record.
The working paper brings scope, population, procedure, exceptions, source references, comments and sign-offs together. DEMO-RUN-018 remains Draft / review incomplete. Moving through this example does not approve a result or create an export.
The invoice is primary evidence; the approved purchase order is the amount authority. An ERP payment export defines the population. Goods receipts support the procedure, reference data supplies mappings, and the synthetic procurement policy defines the criteria.
Tests
The Audit Test Recipe holds Extract, Reconcile and Checks. Match on the PO reference; compare invoice subtotal with the approved PO amount using a ₹1 tolerance and Synthetic Procurement Policy v3 §4.2. Recipe v3 is approved only within this illustration; conclusions still require human review.
Runs
DEMO-RUN-018 uses Recipe v3 and input versions v1. Of 200 received records, 10 are excluded and 190 eligible. Execution completes for 180; 6 await evidence and 4 have processing errors. In the product model, completed Run history is immutable; new versions do not rewrite earlier work.
Review
DEMO-0042: ₹1,25,000 invoice subtotal versus ₹1,20,000 approved PO. The ₹5,000 difference exceeds ₹1 tolerance: Fail / Amount mismatch. Trace the invoice to page 1 and the PO to Orders!H43. Reviewer confirmation remains outstanding.
Findings
A finding groups related confirmed exceptions into an audit issue with criteria, condition, cause, impact, recommendation and sign-offs. DEMO-0042 remains unconfirmed: no finding has been raised and there are zero related confirmed exceptions in this illustration.
Working Papers
The working paper brings scope, population, procedure, exceptions, source references, comments and sign-offs together. DEMO-RUN-018 remains Draft / review incomplete. Moving through this example does not approve a result or create an export.
Source Traces for DEMO-0042
Primary evidence: DEMO-0042.pdf · Page 1 · subtotal region · v1. Original “1,25,000.00” → ₹1,25,000. Illustrative extraction; none in illustration.
Source of truth: purchase-orders.xlsx · Orders!H43 · v1. Original “120000” → ₹1,20,000. Illustrative cell read; none in illustration.
Synthetic Procurement Policy v3 · §4.2 · effective 1 April 2026. Compare invoice subtotal with approved PO amount. Absolute difference must not exceed ₹1. If the approved PO is unavailable, report Insufficient evidence. Invented company policy, not a regulatory requirement.
Missing evidence is reported separately unless the configured procedure explicitly defines its absence as a failure.
Copilot drafts and explains. Auditors approve Recipes and conclusions; overrides require a reason and an attributable record.
02 / The procedure behind the result
Your audit procedure, made repeatable.
Define the objective, population, sources, comparisons and approval requirements before interpreting a result. Extract, Reconcile and Checks belong inside Tests.
“Compare the invoice subtotal with the approved purchase-order amount. Investigate differences above ₹1.”
Scope
Objective: establish amount agreement. Risk: invoice overstatement. PO-backed invoices · Q1 FY27 · invoice, PO and supporting sources.
Logic
Extract subtotal and PO reference. Reconcile to the approved PO as amount authority. Check absolute difference against ₹1; retain all six result states and source Traces.
Control
Set exception severity, reviewer requirements and output before approval. Record author, approver, version and effective date.
A newly interpreted procedure is a draft until a person approves it. This illustration’s existing v3 approval is separate from approval of its results.
03 / Coverage and judgement
Know what was tested. See what needs attention.
One configured check per eligible record. These are illustrative population counts, not an assurance or accuracy measure.
180 / 190
eligible records completed execution. Completion does not resolve human review.
Received
200
Excluded
10
Eligible
190
Completed
180
Awaiting evidence
6
Processing errors
4
Pass157
Fail17
Insufficient evidence6
Needs human review6
Not applicable0
Processing error4
Six states across 190 eligible records. Excluded records are separate from Not applicable outcomes. Missing evidence remains separate unless the configured completeness procedure makes its absence a failure.
AI assists. Code compares. People approve.
AI extracts and drafts; deterministic code performs the configured arithmetic. A reviewer assesses sources, resolves uncertainty and owns the conclusion.
“The difference needs investigation. Retain the amount mismatch until supporting evidence establishes a reason to change it.”
Preparer
Proposes a correction or override with its reason and cited evidence.
Independent reviewer
Assesses the proposal under the maker-checker requirement. A preparer cannot provide their own independent sign-off.
This record
DEMO-0042 · Fail / Amount mismatch. Awaiting reviewer confirmation. No override has been applied.
A decision needs an attributable activity record. Opening this note does not record approval.
04 / The work your team performs
Built around the procedures your team repeats.
Follow P2P amount comparisons, sanction versus disbursement checks, or independent review of journal-entry controls. Each example uses its own supplied evidence and criteria. The examples below are invented illustrations, not current product Runs.
01 / DEMO-0042
Procure-to-pay
Invoice ↔ approved PO ↔ goods receipt ↔ ERP export
Configured check
Compare invoice subtotal with the approved PO amount.
Possible exception
₹5,000 above the approved amount; reviewer confirmation outstanding.
Review output
Record-level exception with source Traces and rule citation. Draft / review incomplete.
Operational and compliance procedures follow the same supplied-evidence model. Scope, applicable sources and suitability need evaluation; document checks do not replace observation or professional judgement.
05 / What the reviewer receives
The working paper carries the evidence with it.
A working paper brings scope, procedure, coverage, results, exceptions, evidence references and sign-offs together. The illustrated P2P work remains Draft / review incomplete; no genuine download is available in this example.
Select a contents annotation to inspect the reasoning and remaining review work.
DEMO-0042.pdf · page 1 · subtotal region · v1. purchase-orders.xlsx · Orders!H43 · v1. Original and normalised values stay with their Traces.
05Comments and sign-offs+
Review incomplete. No confirmed finding, submitted override or final sign-off. Approved working papers lock in the product model; later changes create a new version. This illustration is a draft.
This HTML explanation contains invented data. Discuss the required output in a demo; it is not a downloadable working paper.
06 / Governance and supporting proof
Built for evidence your team is accountable for.
Evaluate the controls alongside your procedure. These questions describe what to verify for the product environment you will use.
Verify engagement permissions, independent review and reasoned overrides with your team’s roles.
Version history and activity
Inspect retained input and Recipe versions, immutable completed Run history and attributable decisions. Integrity of a snapshot does not mean the audit passed.
Data handling and deployment
Confirm hosting regions, provider data flows, retention and contractual commitments for the environment being evaluated.
Keep policies current. Keep answers tied to sources.
Knowledge Hub holds versioned sources; Copilot’s role is to draft and explain with citations. People approve Recipes and conclusions.
Request a demo to discuss your evidence, configured rules and reviewer requirements. Submitting the form requests a conversation; it does not reserve a calendar slot.
