7. Inventory procedures for the procurement of supplies and materials totaling
₱20,835,818.81 were not in accordance with Sections 114, 120, 121, and 122, Chapter 7
of the Manual on New Government Accounting System for LGUs, Volume I, resulting in
an understatement of the inventory and an overstatement of the expense accounts, a
breakdown of internal controls in property and supply management, and an increased risk
of exposing unissued supplies to loss or misuse.
8. Communication expenses were erroneously charged against the appropriation for Office
Supplies Expenses instead of Telephone Expenses, thus, affecting the fair presentation of
the aforementioned accounts in the financial statements as at December 31, 2024.
Significant Audit Observations and Recommendations
In addition to the above-noted deficiencies, below are the significant observations and
recommendations in the audit and/or evaluation of the operations of the City of Tanjay for the
year 2024:
1. Communication expenses amounting to ₱301,229.28 was incurred in excess of the
available appropriations for Telephone Expenses, thus, resulting in illegal
expenditures considered as the personal liability of the approving officers per Section
87 of Presidential Decree (P.D.) No. 1445.
We recommended that the City Budget Officer, together with the approving officers,
refund the overdraft totaling ₱301,229.28 upon issuance of the Notice of Disallowance,
and henceforth ensure that funds are available for the planned expenditures in accordance
with P.D. No. 1445.
2. Transportation allowances totaling ₱334,156.25 were paid to four Office Heads (OH)
despite being assigned with government vehicle(s), contrary to Department of Budget
and Management (DBM) Local Budget Circular (LBC) No. 103 and COA Circular
No. 2012-003, thus, rendering the payments illegal. Moreover, several vehicles were
assigned to the same employee which is considered excessive and detrimental to the
economical use of government funds and property.
We recommended that the four OHs refund the illegal disbursements totaling ₱334,156.25
upon issuance of the Notice of Disallowance because they were not entitled to receive the
Transportation Allowance.
We further recommended that the concerned OHs justify why several vehicles were
assigned to the same accountable officer.
Henceforth, we recommended that the City desist from paying Transportation Allowances
to city officials or employees with assigned vehicle(s) in compliance with DBM LBC No.
103, dated May 15, 2013 and COA Circular No. 2012-003.
iv
