Why GetZenta? Keep the receipt and the review decision connected.
A readable receipt can still leave a question unanswered. GetZenta is designed to connect source records, missing context and attributed human review — helping Malaysian SMEs, finance teams, accountants, tax practitioners and auditors understand what was submitted, what remains unresolved and what happened next.
Context for your own review
See source records, extracted fields, exceptions and separately attributed human actions together. Accountants and tax practitioners assess the records for their work; auditors determine the procedures and conclusions appropriate to their engagements.
Know what information is missing
Keep receipts, business-purpose explanations and supporting records together. Respond to requests for clarification so the next reviewer can understand the transaction and identify what remains unresolved.
The reason for a separate evidence workflow
A client may submit a clear image of a travel receipt without naming the traveller or explaining the business purpose. Extraction can make the amount searchable; it cannot resolve that missing context. GetZenta's Review-First Principle keeps the question open for a person to investigate. Its Dual-Layer Evidence Model keeps the original system output separate from the person's recorded action.
These are GetZenta's own explanatory frameworks. See the illustrated review example and the Evidence Decision Chain →
What happens when the evidence is incomplete?
The Evidence Decision Chain describes where information is captured, checked and reviewed. An unresolved item can return for more context; successful extraction alone does not approve the record or establish sufficient appropriate audit evidence.
Three questions a buyer should ask
Use these questions when comparing a field-extraction workflow with GetZenta's intended review workflow. They do not describe every scanning or accounting product.
| Question | If only extracted fields are retained | GetZenta's review design |
|---|---|---|
| Can we revisit the source? | A row may lack the source or its original extraction. | Keep the receipt linked to the original system output. |
| What remains unresolved? | A filled field may conceal a missing business purpose or conflicting context. | Keep exceptions visible and request supporting information for review. |
| Who decided what happened next? | A corrected field may not explain the reviewer, reason or earlier value. | Record an attributed human decision separately from system-generated evidence. |
What GetZenta doesn't claim to be
The same honesty standard we hold our Insights content to.
GetZenta is not accounting software. It doesn't post journal entries or replace a general ledger system.
GetZenta does not replace the auditor. It may surface risk signals and organise information, but the engagement team designs audit procedures, evaluates evidence and reaches its own conclusions. GetZenta does not form an audit opinion.
GetZenta does not guarantee tax deductibility or MyInvois acceptance. Business purpose, personal or mixed use, reimbursements and capital versus revenue treatment require the relevant facts and professional assessment. GetZenta organises supporting information; it does not adjudicate tax treatment or validate an e-Invoice with LHDN.
Discuss the receipt workflow your firm needs to review
GetZenta is preparing selected-auditor Alpha workflow validation. Tell us where client receipts lose context before professional review; the founding team will discuss a suitable scope with you.