• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
Free ACCA & CIMA online courses from OpenTuition

Free ACCA & CIMA online courses from OpenTuition

Free Notes, Lectures, Tests and Forums for ACCA and CIMA exams

  • ACCA
  • CIMA
  • FIA
  • OBU
  • Books
  • Forums
  • Ask AI
  • Search
  • Register
  • Login
  • ACCA Forums
  • Ask ACCA Tutor
  • CIMA Forums
  • Ask CIMA Tutor
  • FIA
  • OBU
  • Buy/Sell Books
  • All Forums
  • Latest Topics

20% off ACCA & CIMA Books

OpenTuition recommends the new interactive BPP books for March and June 2025 exams.
Get your discount code >>

GDN

Forums › Ask ACCA Tutor Forums › Ask the Tutor ACCA AA Exams › GDN

  • This topic has 9 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 2 years ago by Kim Smith.
Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • November 26, 2020 at 11:01 am #596517
    dvamfire
    Member
    • Topics: 36
    • Replies: 29
    • ☆☆

    hello sir, I would like to as a question.

    in past year question, one of the deficiencies is GDN is assigned to the same number as sales order. no separate sequentially numbering.

    in answer scheme, it said without separate sequentially numbering, it is difficult to identify missing GDN?

    November 26, 2020 at 11:20 am #596522
    Kim Smith
    Keymaster
    • Topics: 133
    • Replies: 8274
    • ☆☆☆☆☆

    Because not every sales order will have a matching GDN. For example – company receives sales orders (say through a website) and they are automatically numbered:

    0002018, 0002019, 0002020, 0002021 ….

    If GDNs are numbered the same 0002018, 0002020, 0002021 – is 0002019 actually a “missing GDN” i.e. meaning that goods were despatched but not recorded on a GDN – or were goods not despatched in respect of sales order 0002019 because the goods weren’t available? Or because the customer’s payment method was rejected?

    November 29, 2020 at 11:17 am #596999
    dvamfire
    Member
    • Topics: 36
    • Replies: 29
    • ☆☆

    i see, okay i got it!! thanks

    November 29, 2020 at 12:41 pm #597008
    Kim Smith
    Keymaster
    • Topics: 133
    • Replies: 8274
    • ☆☆☆☆☆

    You’re welcome!

    August 15, 2022 at 2:35 am #663088
    accacx
    Participant
    • Topics: 4
    • Replies: 3
    • ☆

    Dear sir, I still do not really understand.

    If the GDNs are numbered differently, how do it identify the missing GDNs?
    For instance, regarding the same scenario, the GDNs are numbered 0001, 0003, 0004 — does the missing 0002 indicate missing GDN?

    August 15, 2022 at 7:30 am #663098
    Kim Smith
    Keymaster
    • Topics: 133
    • Replies: 8274
    • ☆☆☆☆☆

    Despatches of goods should have their own sequence – then, absolutely, a break in the sequence is, on the face of it, “missing” and should be investigated (because a goods despatch is the “trigger” for recording a sale – and without the sales invoice – you won’t receive cash). In a manual system (old-fashioned, I know) it could be that the storeperson wrote out the wrong items on a GDN, but realising their mistake, they cancelled the GDN and wrote out a new one. In this case, the spoilt GDN would still be retained to show it was cancelled rather than “lost”.

    August 15, 2022 at 8:07 am #663106
    accacx
    Participant
    • Topics: 4
    • Replies: 3
    • ☆

    Dear sir, thank you for your clarification.

    However, I am curious about the situation for “missing GDN” (goods were despatched but not recorded on a GDN). Since it was not recorded, then it seems nothing will affect the GDN number sequence, whether it is using separate numbering or not (because that particular despatch is totally ignored or forgot thus not recorded). So, how does separate numbering detect this missing GDN?

    August 15, 2022 at 8:29 am #663109
    Kim Smith
    Keymaster
    • Topics: 133
    • Replies: 8274
    • ☆☆☆☆☆

    sequence checking checks for missing documents – it cannot check for missing dispatches that were never recorded in the first place. That’s why you have things like continuous inventory records and spot counts – if every time a spot count showed there to be “unders” – i.e. shortfalls in quantities, that might suggest “shrinkage” – such as theft – that goods could be leaving the warehouse without any record. There would also be “gate” checks – confirming that goods leaving the warehouse are accompanied by a GDN, etc.

    August 15, 2022 at 10:21 am #663119
    accacx
    Participant
    • Topics: 4
    • Replies: 3
    • ☆

    Owhh I got it! Thank you so much Sir! it is really helpful!

    August 15, 2022 at 11:05 am #663121
    Kim Smith
    Keymaster
    • Topics: 133
    • Replies: 8274
    • ☆☆☆☆☆

    You are very welcome!

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)
  • The topic ‘GDN’ is closed to new replies.

Primary Sidebar

Donate
If you have benefited from our materials, please donate

ACCA News:

ACCA My Exam Performance for non-variant

Applied Skills exams is available NOW

ACCA Options:  “Read the Mind of the Marker” articles

Subscribe to ACCA’s Student Accountant Direct

ACCA CBE 2025 Exams

How was your exam, and what was the exam result?

BT CBE exam was.. | MA CBE exam was..
FA CBE exam was.. | LW CBE exam was..

Donate

If you have benefited from OpenTuition please donate.

PQ Magazine

Latest Comments

  • Rajpoot on FA Chapter 5 Questions IAS 37 – Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets
  • bizuayehuy on Foreign exchange risk management (1) Part 1 – ACCA (AFM) lectures
  • effy.sithole@gmail.com on IASB Conceptual Framework – Introduction – ACCA Financial Reporting (FR)
  • kyubatuu on MA Chapter 6 Questions Inventory Control
  • hhys on PM Chapter 14 Questions More variance analysis

Copyright © 2025 · Support · Contact · Advertising · OpenLicense · About · Sitemap · Comments · Log in