How Tata 1mg Improved Order-to-Cash Reconciliation with Cointab

Tata 1mg is a high-volume digital healthcare business with complex order-to-cash reconciliation needs across multiple payment gateways and order types. Before Cointab, the finance team relied heavily on manual checks to match internal order records with external payment and settlement files. That made reconciliation slower, more repetitive, and harder to review at scale.

Cointab introduced a structured reconciliation workflow that helped the team compare records more consistently, track exceptions more clearly, and reduce the time spent on manual matching. The result was a more controlled reconciliation process with better visibility into unreconciled orders and payment discrepancies.

Case study snapshot

The reconciliation challenge

As transaction volumes grew, Tata 1mg needed a more reliable way to manage reconciliation across internal order data and external payment gateway records. The manual process created several operational issues:

• Reconciliation depended on spreadsheet-heavy checks and repeated file comparisons.
• Matching order IDs, payment references, and settlement records took significant time.
• Different order types added complexity to the matching process.
• Exceptions could remain open for too long because they were difficult to isolate quickly.
• Finance teams had limited visibility into unreconciled orders until the end of the process.
• Manual work increased the risk of data entry errors and inconsistent review methods.

For a healthcare platform handling multiple transaction flows, these delays affected finance operations, reporting, and the ability to close periods efficiently.

How Cointab supported the workflow

Cointab gave the team a structured way to manage reconciliation from file upload through final review. Instead of rebuilding spreadsheets for every cycle, the finance team could follow a repeatable workflow.

1. Upload and map the source files

The team could upload the required internal and external reports, then map the relevant fields once for each reconciliation setup. Typical fields included:

• Order identifiers
• Transaction references
• Dates
• Amounts
• Other matching fields used for review

This reduced the need for repeated manual setup in each cycle.

2. Run structured transaction matching

Cointab’s reconciliation engine compared the two sides using structured matching logic. That helped the team review:

• Fully matched transactions
• Partially matched transactions
• Unmatched transactions
• Skipped transactions

This clear separation made it easier for finance users to focus on exceptions instead of scanning every row manually.

3. Review exceptions in the dashboard

The dashboard gave the team a clearer view of payment gateway performance and unreconciled orders. Instead of searching across multiple spreadsheets, users could review open items in one place and prioritize what needed attention.

4. Reuse the setup for future runs

Once configured, the reconciliation workflow could be reused for future periods. That meant the team did not need to rebuild the same matching logic every time a new file arrived.

Results from the implementation

The case study reported measurable operational improvement after the switch from manual reconciliation to Cointab:

• Reconciliation time reduced from about 4-5 days to 2-3 days.
• Accuracy improved from roughly 80% to 90-93%.
• The team gained faster visibility into payment discrepancies.
• Unreconciled orders became easier to track and review.
• Finance staff could handle the reconciliation workload more efficiently without increasing team size.

These improvements mattered because faster, more transparent reconciliation helps finance teams close periods more confidently and respond to open items sooner.

Why this matters for finance teams

The Tata 1mg case is a useful example of what happens when a high-volume business moves from spreadsheet-led matching to a repeatable reconciliation process. The problem is not just speed. It is also control.

Finance teams need to know:

• what records were matched,
• what records were not matched,
• what was skipped and why,
• and which open items require follow-up.

That is especially important in order-to-cash workflows where sales, payments, refunds, settlements, and operational adjustments all need to be reviewed together. A structured platform makes it easier to standardize the process, keep an audit trail, and reduce dependency on manual spreadsheet logic.

Key takeaways from the case study

• Manual reconciliation becomes harder to manage as transaction volume and order complexity grow.
• A clear Side A and Side B workflow improves consistency in matching internal and external records.
• Exception visibility is as important as matched results because it helps teams focus on unresolved items.
• Reusable reconciliation setup reduces repetitive work in future cycles.
• Better reporting supports faster review, closer control, and more confident finance operations.

Customer support during implementation

The source case study also noted that responsive support helped the Tata 1mg team address setup and data-related issues during implementation. For finance teams adopting reconciliation automation, that support can matter during onboarding, field mapping, and initial report review.

Summary of the outcome

Tata 1mg moved from a manual, spreadsheet-heavy reconciliation workflow to a more structured and visible process with Cointab. The change improved cycle time, reduced manual effort, and gave the finance team better control over open items and payment discrepancies.

For businesses managing high-volume order-to-cash reconciliation, this kind of workflow can make day-to-day finance operations more consistent and easier to review.