C_ARSUM Ariba Supplier Management Practice Question
A supplier has submitted their registration, but the internal team identifies an error in the tax documentation. What is the most effective way to address this while maintaining the project's audit trail?
⚠ Common exam trap
Candidates often suggest deleting the questionnaire and starting over, which destroys the audit trail and is considered poor practice compared to the built-in 'Return to Supplier' workflow functionality.
Answer choices
Why each option matters
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
✓
Use the 'Return to Supplier' functionality with a specific comment.
Returning the questionnaire to the supplier with specific comments is the standard procedure in SAP Ariba. This action captures the rejection reason in the project history, providing a clear audit trail. It forces the supplier to rectify the specific error, ensuring that the final data is accurate and compliant with internal requirements before the project progresses to the approval stage, thus maintaining data integrity throughout the lifecycle.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✗
Manually edit the tax data on behalf of the supplier.
Why it's wrong here
Editing data on behalf of a supplier circumvents the supplier's responsibility for their own information. This creates a liability for the firm, as the supplier did not technically certify the corrected data, and it obscures the audit trail because the system will reflect the internal user's change rather than the supplier's.
- ✗
Reject the entire project and initiate a brand new registration.
Why it's wrong here
Rejecting the entire project is inefficient and destroys the progress made on other parts of the registration. It causes significant frustration for the supplier and adds unnecessary administrative burden on the internal team, who would have to reset the entire vetting process rather than just fixing the specific tax documentation error.
- ✓
Use the 'Return to Supplier' functionality with a specific comment.
Why this is correct
This approach is the most effective because it triggers a notification to the supplier, explains exactly what needs fixing, and logs the communication within the project workspace. It ensures accountability and maintains a clean audit trail, enabling the supplier to submit corrected documentation without restarting the entire registration workflow from scratch.
- ✗
Ignore the error and approve the registration with a disclaimer.
Why it's wrong here
Approving a registration with known errors is a failure of internal controls. Tax documentation is critical for compliance and legal reasons; ignoring discrepancies can lead to tax reporting issues, audit failures, and potential legal penalties, making this an unacceptable risk management practice in any professional procurement environment.
About these practice questions
One of 250 original C_ARSUM practice questions on Courseiva, each with a full explanation and wrong-answer analysis — not exam dumps or protected exam content. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
JA
Written and reviewed by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security
Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva
Last reviewed September 2026 · checked against the official SAP exam blueprint
This C_ARSUM practice question is part of Courseiva's free SAP certification practice question bank. Courseiva provides original exam-style practice questions with explanations, topic-based practice, mock exams, readiness tracking, and study analytics to help learners prepare for the C_ARSUM exam.