Start by aligning the comparison scope, then trace each difference to its source and record the question that needs clarification. A difference alone does not establish its cause or tax treatment.
Compare like with like
Before interpreting a difference, record the name of each report, its reporting period, applied filters and whether the figure represents transaction values or tax amounts. Different report scopes can make the comparison unhelpful from the start.
Connect each figure to its source
Keep a reference that takes the reviewer to the report or document behind each figure. A screenshot of a total alone is rarely enough to explain it. Use an identifiable version and record changes to the comparison.
Record the difference instead of hiding it
Use a small register: item, amount in source one, amount in source two, difference, proposed explanation and evidence still needed. Mark an explanation as awaiting verification when support is missing. Do not change a number simply to make the totals agree.
An example: two totals do not explain the cause
Hypothetical review example: an internal report shows SAR 12,000 and a working paper shows SAR 11,500. The arithmetic difference is SAR 500. These figures are not a calculation of tax payable or proof of an incorrect return. The useful question is which items explain the difference and whether both sources cover the same scope.
| Comparison | Source A | Source B | Difference | Follow-up |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Totals under review | SAR 12,000 | SAR 11,500 | SAR 500 | File owner: verify scope and items explaining the difference |
Turn the observation into a precise question
Replace “the figures do not match” with “we compared report A with working paper B and found differences in these items; here are the references, checks completed and points requiring clarification.” Give each question an owner and a follow-up status.
Before handing over the review
Check that sources are clear, the comparison scope is consistent, every difference has evidence or an open question, and review responsibilities are assigned. This is a suggested internal workflow, not a substitute for deciding the tax treatment or filing procedures that apply to a business.
Source and scope
ZATCA’s VAT Journey lists sales and purchase data under its return-filing requirements. The workflow and example above are Mada’s organisational suggestions, not an official checklist or instructions to amend a return.
The idea is clear. What about your case?
Explore the support relevant to your question. Every guide is available without providing contact details.
VAT advisory