Designing an Invoicing SOP for a Growing Startup

In my previous article, I discussed why SOPs become important as businesses grow. In this article, I want to share how I structured the invoicing process in an IT services company that was moving from manual operations towards automation.

Since it was a startup, the team was initially small, volumes were manageable, and coordination was mostly informal. Invoicing was therefore handled manually. However, as the business expanded – with more clients, more consultants, and increasing billing variations – the same system began causing delays and confusion.

At the same time, automation was being planned, and inputs were being gathered from the operations team to build a customized internal system on Remote Desktop. For that to work effectively, the invoicing process first had to be clearly mapped and documented.

So, I mapped the invoicing process exactly as it functioned in the company and formalized it step by step.

Invoicing Process Workflow (SOP Structure)

The flowchart below outlines how the invoicing workflow was designed to cover the entire process – from onboarding to compliance – rather than focusing only on invoice preparation.

The detailed steps for each stage are described below.

1. Client Onboarding & Agreement

Objective: Ensure billing terms and statutory details are defined before invoicing begins.

Sign a formal agreement (MSA/SOW) with clearly defined billing terms
Creation of client master in internal system (GST, PAN, address, tax configuration)
Storage of agreement and statutory data in designated shared folder

2. Consultant Onboarding & Documentation

Objective: Ensure complete documentation before activation for billing.

Collection of identity and statutory documents (PAN, Aadhaar, GST if applicable)
Bank account details for payments
Signed agreement / offer letter
Creation of consultant master in internal records
Mandatory completion before billing eligibility

Updated upon onboarding of each new consultant

3. Monthly Invoice Planning & Data Collection

Objective: Validate billing inputs before invoice preparation.

Monthly billing cycle initiated
Client-side inputs:
- PO / SOW confirmation
- Rate card validation (regular & overtime)
- Applicable GST structure
- Withholding tax (TDS) and other agreed deductions
Consultant-side inputs:
- Approved timesheets
- Overtime approvals
- Reimbursement documentation
Consolidation of all inputs before defined monthly cut-off (e.g., 5th)
Maintenance of issuance and tracking logs

4. Proforma Invoice (Draft) Generation

Objective: Reduce errors before final invoice issuance.

Generation of draft invoice using standard template
Validation of billing period, service description, and tax computation
Attachment of supporting documents
Client review and approval before finalisation

5. Final Invoice Generation & Issuance

Objective: Formal invoice issuance and tracking.

Final invoice generated post approval
Internal review where required
Dispatch via email or client billing portal
Logging of dispatch date, due date, and contact details

6. Payment Tracking & Follow-up

Objective: Ensure timely collection and reconciliation.

Monitoring of agreed payment terms
Follow-up reminders for overdue invoices
Reconciliation of receipts

Updating of tracking system

7. Compliance & Recordkeeping

Objective: Maintain audit-ready documentation.

Archival of invoices and supporting documents in structured cloud folders
Maintenance of GST records and invoice registers
Submission of statutory documents (ESI, EPF, etc.) where required
Sharing of required payroll/compliance documentation with client

One key principle followed throughout was: Invoicing begins at onboarding, not at billing.

Standardizing the Folder Structure

Along with defining the process flow, it was equally important to standardize how documents were stored. A folder structure was created so that every input had a clear place for storage and reference.

The folder hierarchy broadly covered:

Client Master Data
Consultant Documentation
Billing Data (Timesheets, Reimbursements, Proforma, Final Invoices)
Month-wise status tracking

This created a central reference point for finance, HR, and founders, making it easier to manage billing, consultant payments, TDS and compliance requirements, audits, and overall coordination.

Why This Structure Was Important

This workflow was built around how the company actually operated. Every business will have its own variations, and the process should reflect that reality. The reason I am sharing this example is not to suggest that one structure fits all, but to highlight how important it is to define processes clearly before attempting automation.

In this case, once the invoicing flow was properly structured, building the system became much simpler because the software could follow a clearly defined process instead of informal practices.

A Key Takeaway

This experience reinforced for me that strong processes make automation meaningful. When the process is clear, automation brings consistency, reduces dependency on individuals, and improves control over revenue and cash flow.

In finance, that clarity translates into discipline – more predictable billing, better compliance, smoother coordination, and clearer financial visibility as the business grows.

Why Finance Teams Struggle Without SOPs

SOPs, or Standard Operating Procedures, are written guidelines for carrying out routine work so that tasks are handled consistently, regardless of who is doing them.

In very small businesses, SOPs often feel unnecessary because the volume of work is manageable, teams are small, and everyone works in close coordination. Founders are usually involved in most decisions, and many things get done through informal discussions and shared understanding.

The challenge begins as the business grows. Teams expand, new hires join, responsibilities get distributed, and founders can no longer stay involved in every detail. What earlier worked through informal coordination starts breaking down, and finance teams begin to struggle. Tasks still get done, but not smoothly. Follow-ups are missed, numbers don’t always match, and routine work starts taking longer than it should because too much depends on individuals rather than clear processes.

Finance teams usually feel this strain first because finance sits at the centre of operations. Invoicing, collections, payroll, payments, compliance, and reporting are all interconnected, and even a small gap in one area quickly affects another.

A simple example from finance operations

Let me share a simple example from practice:

A delay in raising an invoice often leads to delayed collections. That delay in invoicing usually happens because the required inputs are not received on time, or because responsibility for follow-ups is not clearly defined.

In the absence of a clear SOP, teams are often unsure about the exact steps involved or who owns each part of the process. The issue is not about individual capability or effort, but about the lack of documented instruction and ownership.

Delayed collections then affect cash flow, which can have a significant impact on a growing business.

This is usually the point where businesses realise that informal coordination is no longer enough. Clear SOPs become a necessary and often non-negotiable part of running day-to-day finance operations smoothly.

Why experience alone doesn’t solve this

Faced with these delays and inconsistencies, many businesses assume that the solution is to hire more experienced people. While experience helps professionals handle problems when they arise, it doesn’t prevent the same issues from repeating as volumes grow and more people get involved.

Without clear SOPs, common issues start showing up:

Two people handle the same task differently
Important checks get skipped during busy periods
New team members take longer to settle in because expectations aren’t clearly defined

Over time, this inconsistency creates confusion and duplication of work – even in teams that are otherwise capable and hardworking.

What SOPs actually do in day-to-day finance work

SOPs are often misunderstood as long documents created only for audits or compliance. In reality, effective SOPs are simple working guides.

They answer practical questions like:

When does this activity start?
What information is needed before beginning?
Who prepares the work, who reviews it, and who approves it?
What checks are critical?
What should happen if something doesn’t look right?

In practice, this could mean something as simple as defining who collects billing inputs, by when, and in what format; or clearly laying down when payroll data is frozen and who signs off exceptions. These small clarities remove a surprising amount of day-to-day confusion.

Why SOPs matter even more in remote and growing teams

When teams work remotely or in delivery-driven setups, people are not sitting together at the same location. Operations are largely cloud-based, and communication happens through emails, messages, or scheduled calls, which means small gaps may not be immediately noticed.

Without clear structure and documented steps, work can easily stall or move inconsistently. For example, the invoicing team may be waiting for inputs from another team, or payroll processing may be blocked due to missing approvals.

In such scenarios, SOPs act as a shared reference point that everyone can rely on. They allow work to move forward without constant follow-ups, make handovers smoother, and reduce dependency on specific individuals. They also make onboarding easier, because new team members know what is expected from the start.

Moving from firefighting to reliability

In my practical experience, I have often seen finance professionals take pride in being able to “manage somehow” when things get difficult. Being calm under pressure and fixing issues as they come up are valuable skills. However, relying only on individual firefighting over time becomes exhausting and risky.

SOPs help ease this burden. When processes are clearly defined and documented, work continues smoothly even when people are busy, unavailable, or change roles.

In the long run, strong finance operations are not about how much one person can handle. They are about how consistently the work gets done, month after month, as the business grows.

What comes next

This article focuses on why SOPs matter as businesses scale. In another article, I plan to share how an SOP was set up for invoicing in practice, and the difference it made.

Repatriation from India Explained: NRE vs NRO Accounts

Repatriation of funds from India is one of those things that seems obvious until you actually try doing it.

The assumption is simple – it’s your money, so moving it abroad shouldn’t raise questions.

In practice, however, repatriation is not just a banking step; it sits at the intersection of FEMA regulations and tax compliance. That’s where confusion usually begins.

Before getting into paperwork or forms, one basic question that needs to be answered is this: where is the money held?
In most cases, everything depends on whether the funds sit in an NRE account or an NRO account.

What does “repatriation” really mean?

Repatriation simply means moving money from India to a foreign country, to the account of a non-resident.

This could involve:

Transferring money from an Indian account to an overseas bank account
Moving funds from an NRO account to an NRE account
Remitting sale proceeds of property, shares, or mutual funds
Sending rental income, interest, or dividends earned in India abroad

Although these transactions may all look like ordinary transfers, they are not treated the same under Indian regulations.

NRE vs NRO – the difference that matters

An NRE (Non-Resident External) account typically holds money earned outside India and remitted into the country. Since the source of funds is foreign, both the principal and interest are fully repatriable, and there is no RBI cap on transferring these funds abroad. Subject to routine KYC and bank checks, repatriation from an NRE account is usually smooth.

An NRO (Non-Resident Ordinary) account, on the other hand, holds Indian-source income — such as rent from property in India, sale proceeds of Indian assets, or dividends and interest received locally. Because this income arises in India, repatriation is restricted and subject to tax clearance and FEMA compliance. The RBI permits repatriation of up to USD 1 million per financial year, provided the required documentation is in place.

This difference is the single biggest reason repatriation feels easy in some cases and complicated in others.

Why repatriation from NRO accounts gets complicated

Funds in an NRO account represent income or gains earned in India. Before such money is sent abroad, Indian law requires confirmation that applicable taxes have been paid and that the remittance complies with FEMA rules.

Banks aren’t tax officers, but they can’t ignore tax either. As authorised dealers, they are expected to check that tax and regulatory requirements are in order before processing a remittance. That is why repatriation from NRO accounts almost always leads to questions and documentation requests.

When repatriation is relatively simple – and when it needs planning Repatriation is generally smoother when funds are held in an NRE account, the amounts involved are small, or the tax position is already clear and well documented. This does not mean tax is irrelevant – only that the process tends to be lighter.

Planning becomes essential when funds sit in an NRO account, the amount is significant, or the money represents sale proceeds, capital gains, or accumulated income. In such cases, repatriation is perfectly permitted, but only after tax and regulatory checks are completed.

In Summary

If you’re planning to repatriate funds, start by asking two questions: where did this money come from, and which account is it sitting in today?
Most of the confusion around repatriation clears up once those answers are clear.

What usually comes next

Once it’s clear whether funds are held in an NRE or NRO account, the next question is almost always about documentation – particularly Forms 15CA and 15CB. That paperwork, and why banks insist on it, is where most people get stuck. I’ve covered that separately in another article.

Accounting Treatment of Mutual Fund Investments in Company Books

(And How Companies Should Deal with NAV Changes)

I was once asked a question in an interview that seemed straightforward at first, yet pointed to a practical issue that comes up often in corporate accounting.

“How should mutual fund investments be accounted for in company books? And what do we do with daily NAV changes?”

On the surface, this sounds simple. In practice, however, companies often end up with inconsistent or incorrect accounting, particularly when NAVs fluctuate on a daily basis.

This note explains the correct and commonly accepted accounting treatment, based on accounting standards and real-world practice.

How Mutual Fund Investments Are Classified

In company books, mutual fund investments are generally classified as financial assets. The exact classification depends on several factors, including:

Intent of holding (short-term vs long-term)
Type of mutual fund (debt vs equity)
Applicable accounting framework (Ind AS vs non- Ind AS)

Most operating companies invest surplus funds in either liquid funds, debt funds or short duration / over-night funds. These are typically treated as current investments.

Which accounting standard applies?

Companies do not choose their accounting framework – it is determined by law.

Indian companies to which Ind AS applies must follow Ind AS 109 – Financial Instruments. Other Indian companies continue to follow AS 13 – Accounting for Investments.

Foreign parent companies may prepare their global financial statements under IFRS or US GAAP, but Indian entities are required to follow Indian accounting standards, based on applicability.

Initial accounting treatment – at the time of investment

When a company invests in mutual funds, the accounting entry is straightforward:

Investment in Mutual Fund – Debit
To Bank A/c

The investment is recorded at cost and reflected under “Investments” in the balance sheet, usually as a current investment. At this stage, there is no income or gain – it is simply the deployment of surplus funds.

How should NAV changes be treated?

This is where most practical questions arise, largely because the treatment of NAV changes depends on the accounting framework the company follows. Broadly, there are two approaches, each driven by the applicable accounting standard.

Accounting treatment under AS 13 (Indian GAAP)

Under AS 13, mutual fund investments are valued at the lower of cost or fair value (NAV) at the reporting date.

In practice:

If NAV is lower than cost at year end, the loss is recognised in the books
If NAV is higher than cost, the gain is not recognised (conservative approach is followed)

Daily NAV fluctuations are not recorded and valuation is done only at reporting dates such as month-end or year-end.

Accounting treatment under Ind AS 109

Under Ind AS 109, mutual fund investments are treated as financial assets where such investments are classified as fair value through profit or loss (FVPL):

The investment is carried at fair value (NAV)
Both unrealised gains and unrealised losses are recognised in the profit and loss account

In this case, NAV changes are not merely tracked – they are accounted for as part of financial reporting.

When is profit actually realized?

Irrespective of the accounting framework, final profit or loss is realised only on redemption of mutual fund units.

At the time of redemption:

Sale proceeds are compared with the carrying value in the books
The difference is recognised as profit or loss
Any earlier NAV adjustments naturally reverse or settle

A note on accounting policy and consistency

One point here is critical and often overlooked. Companies need to clearly define their accounting policy for mutual fund investments and apply it consistently year after year. Changing the treatment based on short-term market movements only creates confusion and weakens the credibility of the financials.

Closing thought

The accounting treatment of mutual fund investments in company books is not complex.
What creates confusion is assuming that every NAV movement requires an accounting entry. While NAV tracking can be useful for internal monitoring, accounting should always follow the applicable standard – and once an approach is adopted, it should be applied consistently.