The last rider leaves and the packing counter quietens. The POS reports one delivery total, the platform dashboard shows another, and the bank alert later shows a third. None has to be wrong. They may be counting different things.
That distinction matters before a restaurant calls a payout short. A customer checkout, platform gross order value, restaurant sales, expected settlement and bank credit are five separate totals. The audit works only when each amount has a name, a date window and a source file.
Name the five totals first
Do not begin with the nearest two numbers and force them to agree. Mark the measurement boundary for each one.
| Total | What it describes | Why it may differ |
|---|---|---|
| Customer checkout | What the guest is shown or charged | May include user-side delivery, platform fees, packaging and tax |
| Platform headline or GOV | A metric defined by that platform | Its base may be gross of discounts and include amounts not owed to the restaurant |
| Restaurant net sales | The outlet’s own sales basis | Restaurant-funded discounts, refunds and tax presentation change the row |
| Expected settlement | What the contract and eligible orders say should be remitted | Commission, ads, other agreed services, adjustments and statutory items sit here |
| Bank credit | Cash received for a settlement batch | Timing, batching, reversals and earlier adjustments can move it away from one sales window |
One useful cross-check is the platform’s own definition. Swiggy’s FY2026 annual report defines Food Delivery gross order value as gross of discounts and says it includes user delivery charges, packaging charges, user fees and taxes, excluding tips. The report separately says Food Delivery revenue includes pre-agreed restaurant commissions, restaurant advertising and other business-enablement fees (Swiggy Annual Report FY2026).
That does not disclose one outlet’s commercial terms. It establishes the more limited point: a company-level order-value metric is not automatically the restaurant’s receivable.
Why payout clarity is a current operator question
In July 2026, the Bangalore Hotels Association alleged that some advertising and promotional charges had been applied without clear consent. Its public demands included separate disclosure of commission, GST, advertisements, offers and promotional charges in payment statements. The initial report also noted that Swiggy had not immediately responded (ET HospitalityWorld, 30 July 2026).
Those are association allegations, not a finding that every charge or payout gap is improper. They still point to a sound control: consent, contract and calculation should be visible as separate evidence. A restaurant cannot test a charge hidden inside one line called “other”.
The tax boundary also needs the right document. CBIC Circular 167/23/2021-GST says that, from 1 January 2022, the e-commerce operator pays GST on restaurant service supplied through it under section 9(5). The circular also says the restaurant includes those supplies in aggregate turnover and the operator issues the invoice for that restaurant service (CBIC circular).
This is not a shortcut for booking every tax or statutory line. Goods other than restaurant service and services supplied on a platform’s own account can have a different treatment. Reconcile the actual invoice and return position with the restaurant’s accountant.
Build an order-to-settlement bridge
For one platform and one settlement period, the operating bridge is:
Expected settlement = eligible completed-order value − restaurant-funded discounts − contracted partner charges − refunds and adjustments − applicable statutory deductions
Then calculate:
Unexplained variance = expected settlement − settlement-statement net
The formula makes the gap explicit. Each subtraction needs a source: an order export, campaign consent, contract schedule, service invoice, cancellation record, refund record or statutory certificate. If an amount has no source, it belongs in the exception queue rather than in a broad “platform cost” bucket.
| Bridge row | Evidence to keep | First check when it moves |
|---|---|---|
| Eligible order value | Order ID, delivered status, item and packaging values | Missing, duplicated or differently dated orders |
| Restaurant-funded discount | Campaign ID, funding split, consent and effective dates | Platform-funded and restaurant-funded offers mixed together |
| Contracted partner charges | Agreement, rate card, service invoice and outlet mapping | Old rate, wrong base, duplicate service or charge after opt-out |
| Refunds and adjustments | Order ID, reason, approval and settlement reference | Refund booked in a later batch or cancellation status mismatch |
| Statutory items | Tax invoice, certificate and accountant-reviewed ledger | Restaurant service mixed with another supply or filing window |
| Settlement net | Settlement ID and covered order range | Batch contains an earlier debit, credit or reserve release |
| Bank credit | Value date, amount and narration | Several batches combined or one batch split |
A payout difference becomes manageable when every rupee has an order ID, a contract clause, an invoice or an exception owner.
Separate timing differences from true exceptions
An order can close before midnight while its settlement falls into the next cycle. A refund can be raised in one week and recovered in another. One bank credit can cover more than one outlet or settlement batch. These are timing differences if the trail eventually closes.
An exception is different. The delivered order is absent, the agreed rate does not match the charged rate, the restaurant-funded promotion lacks a consent record, the same adjustment appears twice, or the settlement net does not tie to the bank. Give that line a status, evidence pack and owner. Do not net it against a convenient overpayment elsewhere.
This is also why delivery sales growth alone says little about health. The guide to restaurant same-store sales separates mature-outlet sales from new openings; the same discipline applies to channels. More delivery orders can lift the sales line while discounts and order-linked costs leave contribution unchanged.
Audit consent and contracts by effective date
A screenshot of today’s settings cannot prove what was active during last month’s settlement. Keep a compact change log for each outlet:
- commercial schedule and the date it took effect;
- campaign name, funding split, start and end date;
- approval record for an ad or promotion;
- opt-out, pause or cancellation confirmation;
- invoice number and settlement periods charged; and
- support ticket, promised credit and the batch where it arrived.
The log stops a finance lead from reconstructing commercial history from memory after the dispute window has passed. It also protects the platform or account manager when the charge was properly approved.
Reconciliation is not profitability
A settlement can be perfectly correct and still describe a weak delivery channel. Once the cash bridge closes, calculate contribution separately:
Channel contribution = restaurant net sales − food cost − packaging − contracted channel charges − other order-linked operating cost
Avoid starting this calculation from the customer checkout or platform GOV. Use the restaurant’s own net-sales basis and do not subtract the same discount or fee twice.
Food cost needs its own inventory bridge. The related food-cost percentage guide explains why purchases are not cost of goods sold. Only after settlement and food cost are clean can the restaurant compare delivery contribution with dine-in or takeaway on a consistent basis.
Close one platform every week
A weekly delivery-settlement close
Pick one platform, one legal entity, one outlet and the exact order dates. Record the settlement IDs expected to cover them.
Join the POS or order ledger to the platform export. Resolve missing, duplicate, cancelled and refunded orders before looking at commission.
Put restaurant-funded and platform-funded offers in different columns. Attach the campaign consent and effective dates to the restaurant share.
Recalculate commission, advertising and other services from the agreement that applied during those dates. Tie each charge to its invoice.
Match the statement net to bank credits using settlement references and value dates. Carry timing differences forward; open exceptions separately.
Add food, packaging and other order-linked cost only after the payout is reconciled. Mikro’s food cost calculator can run the inventory-adjusted COGS arithmetic in the browser.