Asset Tagging & Physical Verification

From bulk tag generation to structured verification campaigns — with QR scanning, 3-tier resolution, discrepancy investigation, and custodian self-declaration.

The Challenge

Asset tags are printed from Excel and manually stuck on items. There is no link between the tag and the asset register. When a tag falls off or becomes unreadable, the asset becomes unidentifiable.

Physical verification is done by walking through rooms with a printed list. Results are recorded on paper, then entered into Excel. Discrepancies are noted but not tracked to resolution. The same unverified assets appear in the next cycle.

Auditors require evidence that physical verification was conducted — who did it, when, which assets were verified, and which were missing. Paper-based verification produces none of this systematically.

How We Address This

Bulk Tag Generation

Admin uploads CSV/XLSX with asset IDs. Tags generated in format TAG-{sequence}-{asset_id} using a globally unique sequence counter (database-locked to prevent duplicates). P1 governance fields set automatically.

QR Code PDF Printing

Upload a list of asset IDs or tag IDs. The system generates a PDF with QR codes ready for printing and affixing. Every print event is logged — who printed, when, which assets.

PWA Mobile Scanner

Scan QR codes using a phone camera. No app installation required — works in any mobile browser. Supports manual entry and RFID batch upload for high-volume scanning. Condition reporting (Good/Fair/Poor/Damaged/Not Found) at scan time via POST /tags/scan, or without a scan at all via the dedicated POST /tags/condition-report — the latter records condition directly against the asset (useful for annual custodian reviews) without requiring a scan event. Both endpoints feed the same audit log.

3-Tier Scan Resolution

Scanned values are resolved through three tiers: P1 canonical tag, shadow tag (historical), and legacy tag. Each match tier is recorded with SHA-256 hash for audit integrity. Canonical matches auto-verify the asset.

Verification Campaigns

Admin creates a campaign: name, department, location filter, target date range. Assets matching the criteria are auto-assigned. Campaign lifecycle: create, activate (assigns assets), complete (marks remaining as overdue), cancel. Real-time progress tracking with completion percentage.

Discrepancy Investigation

Assets found with discrepancies (wrong location, wrong condition, missing) are flagged for investigation. Investigation records capture findings, resolution, and admin disposition. Full audit trail from scan to resolution.

5
Condition states
3
Scan resolution tiers
0
Paper-based records
100%
Scan audit trail

Compliance Mapping

CARO 2020

Clause 3(i)(b)

Physical verification conducted at reasonable intervals. Campaign-based verification with completion tracking and overdue alerts.

Companies Act 2013

Section 128

Verification records maintained as books of account. SHA-256 hashed scan entries with immutable audit logs.

AS 10 / Ind AS 16

Asset Identification

Asset identification and location tracking. QR tags linked to register entries. Discrepancies investigated and resolved with documented disposition.

How Assets Enter the System

Assets are created in the register when a goods receipt is posted — at the end of the procurement chain (requisition → purchase order → goods receipt). Each asset already has its classification, department, location, cost, and vendor from the procurement documents. Tagging can happen at the point of receipt or later in bulk — the register record exists first, and the QR tag links to it. For organisations with existing assets that were procured before the system was in place, bulk import from Excel creates the register records, and tags are generated and printed in batches.

Assess How This Applies to Your Organisation

Share a brief overview of your asset base and verification requirements, and we will evaluate how structured tagging and verification may apply to your setup.

Book a Consultation