Hello
With the Memo of Question 3, I believe it was supposed to be included.
My reasoning is that the question was worth 7 marks in total. There were 7 source documents. Vcaa would not usually allocate 7 marks to 6 documents because this is illogical and thats not how they work. How would the examiners give 7 marks for 6 documents? There can't be one for balancing as it was explicitly stated not to balance it. Unless the 7th mark is for the correct dates (At the end of the month, not on the day) which it might be, I think the Memo should have been included.
Furthermore, when you do accounting questions, the assumption is made that YOU are the accountant for the business. The Memo was addressed to YOU as the accountant, to include. Also, the final wording of the question supports the Memo inclusion. It says:
"Complete the GST Clearing account for the month of July". To complete the GST Clearing account accurately for July, the accountant would have paid the outstanding GST Balance "At the end of the month", which is stated on the memo. Otherwise, it wouldn't be accurate because the outstanding GST balance wouldn't have been paid at the end of the month.
That being said, its possible that I'm wrong and many seem to think it should have been omitted.
The Memo is a source document that is used for internal transactions. If we go back to the absolute basics of accounting, we need source document evidence to record cash payments. The memo did not provide any information for any transaction that had occurred. Yes, I do agree we were accounting for that specific business, however, you cannot account for a request- the memo outlined a request, not actual transaction that has occurred. And I don’t think we have ever come up with the task where we ourselves pay anything. We do it by source document evidence. What also was not evident was whether this settlement was for opening balance or closing because both were credit. Therefore according to what I feel, they might have been testing us on our knowledge of source document evidence. And btw, they always say not to look at marks and number of entries in many past assessors report. Idk, maybe 1 extra Mark for correct dates or not adding in that GST settlement entry. But you never know, your theory May be correct as well. It will be interesting to see what they say