Meet Ira. Your recon tool clears 96%. Ira works the queue that's left, item by item, with the trail your auditors want.
163 exceptions in, 141 closed with evidence, 17 pending your approval, 5 escalated as suspected duplicates worth ₹4.2L. Oldest open item: 6 days, down from 41.
What Ira does, item by item.
The whole queue, not a sample. Every finding cited back to its source.
Picks up every exception your matching engine throws out.
Chases the break across statements, ledgers and gateway reports.
Drafts the closure with the evidence chain attached, item by item.
Escalates the ones that look like more than a timing difference.
Keeps an aging view of the queue so nothing quietly turns ninety days old.
Hands your auditors a closure trail instead of a shrug.
- ·Write-off decisions
- ·Adjusting entries
- ·The bank conversation
- →Exception investigation
- →Evidence-linked closures
- →Queue aging and escalation
Ira never posts an entry. She investigates and drafts the closure; posting is a human's click, every time.
How it earns trust.
Pilot on your history, supervised on your queue, governed always.
Runs on a historical corpus your team already reviewed. You score its findings against what your reviewers caught. No production access.
Works the live queue. Every finding is a draft until a named human approves it, and every rejection is logged and measured.
The envelope never relaxes. Reading, checking, and drafting get automated. Approval stays human, by design.
The hand-off.
How Ira pings a human when it's your call.
The honest answers.
No dodging, no contact-sales-to-find-out.
Does Ira post to the ledger?+
We already have a recon tool. Why Ira?+
What do auditors see?+
Put Ira on the queue.
Start with a paid pilot on your historical corpus, finished in weeks. Then a full deployment over 3 to 4 months, with a forward-deployed team working alongside your people.
