During bank reconciliation, Zoho Books pre-selects transactions as cleared based on the payment date recorded in Zoho Books — even when the bank clearing date, which Zoho displays in that same row, falls after the reconciliation period end date.

The practical result: checks that had not yet cleared the bank as of the period end arrive in the reconciliation already marked cleared. The reconciliation then cannot balance until you locate and uncheck each one by hand.

To reproduce

1. Record a check payment dated May 20.
2. The bank pays the check on June 5. Match the bank statement line — Zoho now displays "Jun 05" in the Statement Details column of that row.
3. Start a reconciliation for May 1 – May 31.
4. The row appears, which is correct, and it is already checked, which is not.

Zoho auto-selects on the payment date recorded in Zoho Books and ignores the bank clearing date it is displaying in the same row.

Why it matters

Checking a row asserts that the item cleared the bank within the statement period. A check the bank paid on June 5 is not in the bank's May 31 ending balance, so while it stays checked the Difference cannot reach zero. On any check-heavy account that means picking those items out of several hundred rows by eye, every month, before the reconciliation can be completed.

To be clear about scope: displaying these rows is correct and shouldn't change. That's how outstanding checks surface. The only issue is the default state of the checkbox — it should default to unchecked when the matched bank clearing date falls after the period end date, and let the user check it deliberately.

Questions

Reported through support in early June, reference #160453615, currently classified as feedback with no fix timeline.

Two questions for the group:

1. Is anyone else running into this on a check-heavy account, and how are you handling it each month?
2. Does anyone have a plausible explanation for why Zoho keys auto-selection to the book date rather than the bank clearing date it already has on screen — and why this isn't being treated as a defect? If there's a legitimate accounting reason I'm not seeing, I'd like to hear it.