In AX , we have Purchase order form , same form will be used to create the purchase order and purchase return order .because this same po number series will be applicable to Purchase return order .
In my client is saying that AX is doing wrong , becuase both are seperate documents , need to have the seperate number series .
In india most of the clients will use the different number series for different documents and you will find the same concept in Axapta also for example -PR Number series , Enquiry number series , Quote number series , PO number series are different.
but why Purchase return order does not have the seperate number series ?
When it comes to audit point of view also , it is question mark ?
Could you share your experience that why MS has designed like this ?
There is technically no agreed convention unless legally defined, and it is not. These are separate documents and have separate numbers and can be identified - what they do not have is a separate number sequence, but even if they did it would not matter, it is identifiable uniquely and that is what counts. The purchase order has no separate sequence because that is the way it was designed, the same was true of sales return orders in version 4 (or maybe earlier). You can post a recommendation to change this process.
There should be no question mark over audit. In my experience processing purchase returns is not seen as a business critical requirement in most companies due to quality control on inbound, and even ones that I have experience of handling 100’s of lines a week they have never requested a separate number sequence because the order type makes it instantly identifiable. However there are customers that want it to be different, and in the current incarnation of AX this would be a customization, and like all of them you would explain how it could be handled as standard and assess if the customization is justified.