Why GetZenta? Keep the receipt and the review decision connected.
A readable receipt can still leave a question unanswered. GetZenta is designed to show what was captured, what needs further context and what a human reviewer decided — so Malaysian SMEs and audit firms can work from the same evidence trail.
Context for your own review
See the source record, extracted fields, exceptions and separately attributed human actions. Your team still decides what procedures to perform and what conclusions the evidence supports for its engagement.
Know what information is missing
Keep receipts and transaction context together, and respond to requests for additional support. MyInvois rules and tax treatment depend on the transaction and applicable requirements; organising a receipt does not decide either question.
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 the stages where information is recorded, checked and reviewed. An unresolved item can return for more context; it does not become approved evidence merely because fields were extracted.
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.