Serial number issue in part ii
This query is : Resolved
18 April 2013
Regarding Cenvat Input Register. As per Excise rule separate register is required for Capital and Non Capital,please confirm wheter serial number should be in continue in case of Capital register and Non capital register as our software genrating serial numbers for consolidated list (Cpaital and non capital) ?
Example : Cenvat Register
Serial Number
1 (Non Capital)
2 (Capital)
3 (non -Capital)
4 (non-Capital)
Now when we print the Cenvat input register for Capital it show serial 2
For Non Capital =1,3, and 4 Please confirm whether it is correct or not
Example : Cenvat Register
Serial Number
1 (Non Capital)
2 (Capital)
3 (non -Capital)
4 (non-Capital)
Now when we print the Cenvat input register for Capital it show serial 2
For Non Capital =1,3, and 4 Please confirm whether it is correct or not
29 April 2013
No Response !!!!
23 July 2025
Your query pertains to the **Cenvat Input Register** and whether **serial numbers** for **capital goods** and **non-capital goods** can be **consolidated** or must be **separate and continuous** under Excise Rules.
---
### ✅ Clarification:
As per **Central Excise Rules**, especially Rule 9(5) of the **CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004**, and the general documentation and record-keeping provisions:
* **Separate registers** are to be maintained for **capital goods** and **inputs (non-capital goods)**.
* However, there is **no specific requirement** in the rules that **serial numbers** must be **independent or continuous** **within each category only** (i.e., no requirement that serial numbers start from 1 separately for capital and non-capital).
---
### 🔍 Your Example:
| Serial Number | Type |
| ------------- | ----------- |
| 1 | Non-Capital |
| 2 | Capital |
| 3 | Non-Capital |
| 4 | Non-Capital |
If the software generates a **consolidated serial number** (i.e., a running number across both capital and non-capital goods), and then when printing separate registers the serial numbers **reflect this consolidated sequence**, **it is acceptable**, provided:
1. **Separate registers/prints** are still maintained for inputs and capital goods.
2. **Details are clear and traceable**.
3. The records are **not misleading** and can be **easily reconciled** during audit.
---
### ✅ Conclusion:
Yes, your software-generated format is **correct and acceptable** under Excise rules **as long as**:
* Capital and non-capital registers are printed separately.
* The serial numbers, though consolidated, clearly identify the nature of goods.
**No violation of rules** arises due to such serial number logic, and this approach is common in automated accounting/ERP systems.
Let me know if you want a suggested format or sample layout for both registers.
---
### ✅ Clarification:
As per **Central Excise Rules**, especially Rule 9(5) of the **CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004**, and the general documentation and record-keeping provisions:
* **Separate registers** are to be maintained for **capital goods** and **inputs (non-capital goods)**.
* However, there is **no specific requirement** in the rules that **serial numbers** must be **independent or continuous** **within each category only** (i.e., no requirement that serial numbers start from 1 separately for capital and non-capital).
---
### 🔍 Your Example:
| Serial Number | Type |
| ------------- | ----------- |
| 1 | Non-Capital |
| 2 | Capital |
| 3 | Non-Capital |
| 4 | Non-Capital |
If the software generates a **consolidated serial number** (i.e., a running number across both capital and non-capital goods), and then when printing separate registers the serial numbers **reflect this consolidated sequence**, **it is acceptable**, provided:
1. **Separate registers/prints** are still maintained for inputs and capital goods.
2. **Details are clear and traceable**.
3. The records are **not misleading** and can be **easily reconciled** during audit.
---
### ✅ Conclusion:
Yes, your software-generated format is **correct and acceptable** under Excise rules **as long as**:
* Capital and non-capital registers are printed separately.
* The serial numbers, though consolidated, clearly identify the nature of goods.
**No violation of rules** arises due to such serial number logic, and this approach is common in automated accounting/ERP systems.
Let me know if you want a suggested format or sample layout for both registers.
You need to be the querist or approved CAclub expert to take part in this query .
Click here to login now
Click here to login now
Similar Resolved Queries
Unanswered Queries
- CAPITAL GAIN REDEVELOPED FLAT
- Multiple payment of self assessment tax for A Y 2025-2026
- REGARDING ITR FILING QUESTION
- Requirement under FEMA &RBI
- CLOSING STOCK QUERY
- PF wage ceiling
- Correction in TDS return New Traces Portal
- TDS refund Indemnity Bond
- Query regarding TDS on EPFO Higher Pension Arrears- under wrong section
- Query regarding Item 61/62/63 vs Item 64 in ITR-3
- WHERE I SHOW GST 0% INVOICE IN GSTR1 (EITHER TABLE 7 OR TABLE 8)
- Concept of Vendor and customner reconciliation
- Mistake in e-invoice identified after 24 hours
- EXPORT PAYMENT
- NRI ITR2 account in 2025-26.
- Query regarding reporting of exempt foreign remuneration in ITR (AY 2026-27)
- FEMA/RBI treatment — Amazon.ca arbitrage (US buy, Canada sell, goods never enter India)
- Goods return by customer
- INWARD REMITTANCE FOREIGN
- CPC and SAC
Trending Online Classes
-
DT & Audit (Exam Oriented Fastrack Batch) - For May 26 Exams and onwards Full English
CA Bhanwar Borana & CA Shubham Keswani
Subscribe to Pro
Join an elite circle of professionals
CAclubindia
