GR Value is not matching with PO Value while posting good receipt.

Hi Experts,
My client has raised the PO with accounts assignment category K (COST CENTRE) with material description.
but he has received invoice receipt before good receipt.while invoice receipt he has entered wrong value for some qty as per PO intially and cancelled that wrong entry.
I have gone through original & cancelled invoice document accounting entries. below is entries:
Original invoice document accounting entries:
GR/IR Clearing account: Debited
Vendor account: Credited
during cancelling the above document it should be vendor acc is debited and GR/IR account is credited but in the system below entries taken place
Cancelled invoice document accounting entries:
Vendor account : Debited
GR/IR Account : Credited
Consumption Account : Credited
Why consumption acc taken place here. pls help what are the possibilitis....
these entries affecting good receipt value means while taking goods receipt for some qty out of full qty value is not matching with PO value.
but while cancelling the GR documents system taking correct values as per PO. Please help.
Kindly help in this regards
Regards
Mohan

Hi,
Check the Credit Memo document whether G/L tab is there & whether any G/L account is entered ?
I think instead of cancelling the MIRO document they might have posted a vendor credit memo manually by specifying a consumption GL.
Thanks & Regards,

Similar Messages

MB5b Value is not matching with MB52 value

Hi Expert,
Please tell me what is the difference between tcode mb5b and mb52.In our system MB5B Valuated Stock Qty and Value is not Matching with MB52 (Unrestricted + GIT+ stock in QI) stock and value.
Edited by: lifesgud on Apr 26, 2011 2:50 PM

Hi,
Please post this thread on the Inventory Management forums for the relevant expertise (component MM-IM-GF-REP). Unfortunately I don't have sufficient permissions to move it for you.
Rgds,
Colum

Inventory Valuated Stock Value is not matching with R/3

Dear Friends,
we are in a big mess.Needed your help urgently
We are in sap netweaver 2004s.We are implementing the standard business content only for one of our client.We have loaded the Inventory data into BW by following "How to handle the Inventory Management" document.
We have loaded the inventory data into 0IC_C03 using standard transferrules and update rules.
The sequence we followed as:
IN R/3
Filled the setup tables for during the posting free time(non-business hours)
Stock intialization
Material Movements
Evaluations
IN BW
We had loaded the data into only 0IC_C03 cube using standard update rules(no changes done)
2LIS_03_BX-Generate intial stock with no marker update unchecked
2LIS_03_BF-Full update with no marker update checked
2LIS_03_UM-Full update with no marker update checked
When we compared the data between R/3 and BW they are many materials "Valuated Stock Value" is not matching with R/3.For some materials value is matching with R/3 but for some other materials its not matching with R/3.Some materials are showing the negative figures for Valuated Stock Value.
But the valuated quantity value is exactly matching with R/3 for all the materials.
We have tryed to many ways in the past 10 days to find out the solution.We have followd the notes 589024 and implemented the formula.But no luck so far.
Needed your help..Any suggestions would be highly appreciated.
Please help us with your inputs.
Thanks in advance.
Regards
Soujanya

Hi Sudheer,
No We haven't implemented this note.
In start routine we already have the first start routine in the note.
INSERT BEGIN
loop at DATA_PACKAGE.
    if DATA_PACKAGE-stockcat eq 'V' or
       DATA_PACKAGE-stocktype eq 'V'.
      delete DATA_PACKAGE.
    endif.
endloop.
if abort is not equal zero, the update process will be canceled
ABORT = 0.
INSERT END
We should comment the above start routine and follow the remaining section as below?
==========================================================
Notes:
However, if you want a report of these consumption values, proceed as follows:
1. Do not use the start routine listed above.
2. Create two new key figures (cumulative values):
   1. Material consumption value (ZVERWERT, for example) with unit 0BASE_UOM
   2. Material consumption quantity (ZVERMENGE, for example) with unit 0LOC_CURRCY
3. Include these in the InfoCube definition.
4. Update these key figures from 2LIS_03_BF as follows:
-> material consumption value:
IF ( COMM_STRUCTURE-processkey EQ '100'   "Other Issues
    OR COMM_STRUCTURE-processkey EQ '101'   "Returns / Vendor
    OR COMM_STRUCTURE-processkey EQ '104'   "Material Transfer
    OR COMM_STRUCTURE-processkey EQ '105'   "Stock Adjustment InvD
    OR COMM_STRUCTURE-processkey EQ '106'   "Stock Adjustment Other
    OR COMM_STRUCTURE-processkey EQ '110' ) "Issues from Stock
                                            "Transfers
   AND COMM_STRUCTURE-bwapplnm EQ 'MM'
only movements which are relevant for stock control
   AND COMM_STRUCTURE-cppvlc <> 0
   AND COMM_STRUCTURE-stockcat EQ 'V'
   AND COMM_STRUCUTRE-stocktype EQ 'V'.
result value of the routine
    RESULT = -1 * COMM_STRUCTURE-cppvlc.
if the returncode is zero, the result will be updated
    RETURNCODE = 0.
ELSEIF ( COMM_STRUCTURE-processkey EQ '000'   "Other Receipts
    OR COMM_STRUCTURE-processkey EQ '001'   "Goods Receipt/Vendor
    OR COMM_STRUCTURE-processkey EQ '004'   "Material Transfer/"Receipt
    OR COMM_STRUCTURE-processkey EQ '005'   "Stock Adjustment InvD
    OR COMM_STRUCTURE-processkey EQ '006'   "Stock Adjustment Other
    OR COMM_STRUCTURE-processkey EQ '010' ) "Receipt from Stock
                                            "Transfer
only movements which are relevant for stock control
   AND COMM_STRUCTURE-cppvlc <> 0
   AND COMM_STRUCTURE-stockcat EQ 'V'
   AND COMM_STRUCUTRE-stocktype EQ 'V'.
result value of the routine
    RESULT = COMM_STRUCTURE-cppvlc.
if the returncode is zero, the result will be updated
    RETURNCODE = 0.
ELSE.
if the returncode is not equal zero, the result will not be updated
    RETURNCODE = 4.
ENDIF.
if abort is not equal zero, the update process will be canceled
ABORT = 0..
-> material consumption quantity:
The code is the same, but COMM_STRUCTURE-cpquabu replaces COMM_STRUCTURE-cppvlc.
-> The characteristic value calculation is the same for the other key figures.
5. Update these key figures from the 2LIS_03_UM in the same way.
=======================================================

The value in flexfield context reference web bean does not match with the value in the context of the Descriptive flexfield web bean BranchDescFlex. If this in not intended, please go back to correct the data or contact your Systems Administrator for assi

Hi ,
We have enabled context sensitive DFF in Bank Branch Page for HZ_PARTIES DFF , We have created Flex Map so that only bank branch context fields are only displayed in the bank branch page and as we know party information DFF is shared by supplier and Customer Page so we dint want to see any Bank Branch fields or context information in those pages.
We have achieved the requirement but when open existing branches bank branch update is throwing below error message :
"The value in flexfield context reference web bean does not match with the value in the context of the Descriptive flexfield web bean BranchDescFlex. If this in not intended, please go back to correct the data or contact your Systems Administrator for assistance."
this error is thrown only when we open existing branches, if we save existing branch and open then it is not throwing any error message.
Please let us know reason behind this error message.
Thanks,
Mruduala

You are kidding? It took me about 3 minutes to scroll down on my tab to get to the triplex button!
Habe you read the error message?
Quote:
java.sql.SQLSyntaxErrorException: ORA-04098: trigger 'PMS.PROJECT_SEQ' is invalid and failed re-validation
Check the trigger and it should work again.
Timo

Fund center reports Assigned values are not matching with ledger balances.

Thanks for your Support. We have activated funds management in May-2009. And deactivated one or two times. Now the status is active.
Now we are taking reports the assigned values are not matching with gl ledger balances.
1. We need to update records for April- May.
2. Records in between deactivated and activate time.
Please suggest updating fund centers and commitments.
Regards

hi ELI
i have checked the follwoing secnarios
1. funds management deactivated.
2. one document posted with amount10000
3. funds management activated.
4. we have executed FMN0
here no document is selected after execution.
Please suggest what are the activities we need to do if i am wrong...
Regards

Grand total values are not matching with Detail report

Report has grand totals and when I drill to the detail report, grand total values are NOT matching with parent report totals, I did some analysis but I'm clueless on this issue.
Please provide your thoughts and insight on this issue..
Thanks

is your summary and detail reports hitting different facts, like summary hitting aggregate and detail report hitting it's corresponding detail level fact..?
if then,
From Front-end:
Fix the filter values in detail report that are passing from master report then try delete each columns then check the grand total. If you found your values is matching by deleting particular column then you need to investigate what is the issue around with that dimension table..
From Database side:
1. check first aggregate table has proper aggregate data of it's detail..
2. Take the detail report obiee generated query and try to comment each dimension table and it's corresponding joins to the facts, (before, this delete all the dimensional columns and other measures from select statement and put only that measure where you are getting wrong value, so that you need not to comment all the select and group by columns which saves your time.. ). Need to check by commenting each dimensional wid and it's table from clause, if you found that values is matching then there is some problem with wid columns data population in your ETL.
Is that BI-Apps project?
btw, whtz ur name?

Acquistion Value Negative in Area 01 while posting Goods Receipt (MIGO)

While posting a Goods Receipt am facing the error Acquistion Value Negative in Area 01.
The related Purchasing Document has an Account Assignment as AUC.
I have checked the Asset Master of that AUC. In the Depreciation Areas Tab when I am
trying to put the negative values allowed, it says that E669 Fiscal year 2009 is already closed in Financial Accounting.
Practically it is not possible for me to open the fical year 2009 in Financial Accounting since our Fiscal Year Variant is V3(April-March) and we currently in the period
05/2010.
Point to be considered is that Year end closing for Fixed Assets (AJAB) for 2008 is complete and year 2009 for Fixed Assets should ideally be open.
Please let me how to handle the situation without opening the closed Fiscal Year in Financial Accounting.
Regards
Gemini

Gemini,
First set your COD with OAPL.
Go to OADB and choose all values allowed for acquisition value under management of values for your effected dep area.
SAVE and import these settings to your production system and post your GRN.
Thanks,
Srinu

Inventory data not matching with R/3

Hi,
In R/3 production we have the data from 1999-Till date.From 1999-2004 Data was archieved in R/3 system.So we have two years live data in the R/3 production.
We have filled the setup tables and extracted the Inventory data then loaded into 0IC_C03 Cube.
But the values in BW report from 0IC_C03 is not matching with the values in R/3 report.
1.What could be the reason?
2.If we need to extract the archieved data from R/3 what are the steps we need to do?.
Pls help us with your suggestions.

We have followed as per the How to handle inventory managment document.
The quanity value is matching between R/3 and BW.But the Valuated Stock Value is not matching for some of the materials.For the current period it showing the right value(for ex.if we check for 12th Month).
But If we check the material for old months like October,Aug the value of valuated stock value is not matching with R/3 for some of the materials.
In RSDV validity table date maintained from 1999-Dec'200.
We are using the standard business content cubes and update rules.Is there any change needs to be done in update rules for 0IC_C03 cube to get the right values for all the materials?..
Pls help with your inputs.
Thanks
Soujanya

Accounting doc entries not matching with the the entries from j_1ipart2 entries

Hi,
After creating PO, I have done MIGO and J1IEX. Now, posted MIRO. The end screen shows a number stating accounting document created.
I checked the accounting doc in fb03 and the document is displayed over there. I also checked the table for values captured in PART2 of excise. The value displayed in table is not matching with the value displayed in accounting document. Can anyone help?

Hello Tejas,
Here is the updated version of the situation.
After the transaction J1IEX, I got a message saying an 'Accounting Document' has been created. But the accounting document number does not match with the original values. I checked all the tables and found out that the accounting document is not created.
In this case, I thought of creating an accounting document manually and adding them directly to the table.
Here are my questions,
-Can I manually create an accounting document for multiple line items?
-Few tax values should be split and should go to 2 different GL accounts. so how to do this if I am creating it manually
-Or can I delete the values captured during 'J1IEX' in the table and reopen the GR so that the t-code j1iex can be processed again?

Free space of mdf and ldf does not match with database free space

In SSMS i saw file size related properties and found below details for one database.Here values does not match with other properties. Here size of the mdf, ldf and total size matches with other values under each window. But Available free space of mdf and ldf
if added then it does not equal to Available free space shown in shrink database window and free space shown in database properties. This is true for any database. Why is it so? Please can anyone explain the logic behind this?
Under database properties:
Size: 91.31 MB
Space available:13.40 MB
Under database file properites:
mdf size:17 MB
ldf size:75 MB
under shrink database:
currently allocated size:91.31 MB
Available free space:13.40 MB
under shrink file-for data file:
currently allocated size:16.38 MB
Available free space:12.63 MB
under shrink file-for log file:
currently allocated size:74.94 MB
Available free space:55.62 MB

Hi,
Database properties and database shrink show the total (log+data) values. Others show the individual sizes, log and data separately.
I hope it helps.
Janos
There are 10 type of people. Those who understand binary and those who do not.
My Blog |
Hire Me
This does not answer my question. If you add allocated space of mdf and ldf it equals to database allocated size.But i am asking why this ldf and mdf free space together(when added 55.62+12.63 ) does not equal to database free space?

CO-PA Cost Component do not match with Standard Cost Component Values

Dear Members,
The CO-PA Cost Components (as mapped through KE4R), do not match with Standard Cost Component values for the Group Currency. In local currency the values match.
System is correctly picking up VPRS value, both in local currency and Group Currency, which is equal to the total of Standard Cost Components however, it is the Value Fields linked to the Standard Cost Components in Group Currency that do not match.
In KE40, the Indicator is 4:Released Standard Cost Estimate matching Goods issue Date.
I have verified KEPH/CKMLPKEPH tables. The values are same as that of VPRS.
Any help/clues?
Regards
Satya

Hi,
In case of billing documents the group valuation approach is managed in the data structures of the legal valuation in additional value fields. To control costs and revenues in the different views separately, you must create additional value fields and assign them to the data structures.
The field contents must be filled via the CO-PA user exit, they cannot be entered by assigning conditions to value fields. The profit center valuation is updated in a separate ledger. No separate value fields are necessary.
The exit to be used is function module 'EXIT_SAPLKEII_002' ( enhancement COPA0005 ). Within the exit you have the complete SD data avaialble in the tables 'T_ACCIT' and 'T_ACCCR'. The conditions can be found in T_ACCIT and the corresponding values ( linked via 'POSNR' ) in table T_ACCCR. The PA line item and the corresponding SD item in table ACCIT
can be mapped via the line item field 'RPOSN' and the field 'POSNR_SD' in table ACCIT.
regards
Waman

GL account balance not matching with the total stock value

Hi,
The GL account balance is not matching with the total stock value in report RM07MBSTfor stock in transit, Can anyone please let me know, where should, I look into to verify the reason for difference.
Quick response will be appreciated.
Thanks & Regards

I am able to solve this issue. My client has a customized report, which helped me to look into the details of stock in tranisit account. Stock in transit account actually include PPV and TPV alongwith standard cost.

Drill down value not matching with Displayed Report Painter Issue-GR55

Hi,
Need your help for an issue in drill down value of report painter from actual cost coloumn.
I have created a new report group based on OSS Note-157720 in GR55 Traction. This new report group will provide data of Planed / Actual cost, Planned / Actual Quantity of the project in range of fiscal year/periods. The issue in this report is displayed data of actual cost is not matching with drill down data. The actual cost coloumn is formula coloumn which framed by subtracting All periods cost coloumn, Before Periods Cost Coloumn and After periods cost coloumn.
Could you suggest on this issue.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Regards,
Rakesh

The report you are running first might have been created with some hidden columns that contain more than one variables relating to period and fiscal year. These may not be matching those that are required to run the drilldown. Look into the definition of the drilldown report. If you would want to match the first report, It may be better to identify which report runs on drilldown and the run that report with the required parameters.

PO : Invoice value in ME23N is not matching with 2LIS_02_SCL field BWGEO

Hi Expert,
              1) Invoice value in ME23N tcode is not matching with datasource 2LIS_02_SCL field BWGEO in item level
for few item BWGEO field contain the data with tax but for few item the value is not coming correctly.
2) The value is not matching for that particular item which has same material document in other Item level.
eg. PO(eg 60000XXXXX) if item 1 has invoice value with tax is 1300+52 and its material doc is XXXX1234. if same material doc XXXX1234 is present in
item 2 for another invoice of same material invoice value with tax is 1200+48. In that case the value which is coming in
BWGEO field is 1300 only.
I am working in 7.0 system for AFS specific. My whole transaction is in INR.
Thanks and Regards
Lalit Kumar

Please review the information below from one of our deverlopers
- it may explain the behaviour you are seeing on your system:
When posting a GOODS RECEIPT for a DELTA UPLOAD process you only will
have the information regarding the GOODS RECEIPT values (XMCEKET-WEMNG
and XMCEKET-WEWRT) and not the invoice values (XMCEKET-REMNG and
XMCEKET-REWRT).
When posting an INVOICE for a DELTA UPLOAD process you only will
have the information regarding the INVOICE values (XMCEKET-REMNG
and XMCEKET-REWRT) and not the GOODS RECEIPT values (XMCEKET-WEMNG and
XMCEKET-WEWRT).
The DELTA INIT process is different, because for this process, all
information about posted documents against a purchasing order need to
processed again and this means that all documents related to an order
(invoices, goods receipt, deliver costs, goods issue, etc)
are read from database and rebuild one by one in the same process, and
of course this information in available.
When posting an invoice, the goods receipt information is not
available because of the following reasons:
1 - System standard fields.
In datasource 2LIS_02_SCL, there is only
fields BWMNG - that represents quantity, BWGEO and BWGEO that
represent values. The information under these fields are dependent
from the information of field BWVORG (BW transaction key). This field
determines whether these values are from a purchasing order, goods
receipt or an invoice. You never have a missing information, but when
you want to get goods receipt values, you need to check where the
BWVORG correspond to goods receipt process and not invoice.
2 - Performance
There are documents as purchasing orders and schedule agreements that
are opened for years in some customer system (it may not be your case),
where goods receipt and invoices have been posted during all this time.
Every time that a new document is posted in order to built the
cancellation sentence (ROCANCEL = X) and in order to add the new
value in the old, system need to process all previous posted documents,
and this means processing time. For this reason when posting invoices
only previous documents that are invoices are taken into account and
not goods receipt.
The delta fields, DBWMNG and DBWGEO, are the difference between the
purchasing order quantity and values and the goods receipt quantity
and values, then is natural that this information is only available
when processing a goods receipt and not when processing an invoice.
I'm sorry if this is not the system behavior that you are expecting,
but this is the normal standard behavior and this is really necessary
because of the system performance when dealing with documents that
have a long order history.
Hope this information is useful for you
Best Regards
Barry

PickList Update - Input values [...] does not match with expected class names

Hi everybody!
I try to update a picklist via b1if but I always get the following error-message:
Exception : Input values '["3" , "3"]' does not match with expected class names '["com.sap.smb.sbo.api.ICompany" , "java.lang.Integer"]' for SBO object type '156'
As you can see in the error-message I use object type 156 “PickLists”.
Below you can see the message to the B1 Object – atom:
<Payload id="atom1" Role="X">
    <System xmlns="">0010000100</System>
    <QueryParams xmlns="">
        <AbsoluteEntry>3</AbsoluteEntry>
    </QueryParams>
    <PickLists xmlns="">
        <row>
            <PickDate>20120914</PickDate>
        </row>
    </PickLists>
    <PickLists_Lines xmlns="">
        <row>
            <OrderEntry>248</OrderEntry>
            <OrderRowID>0</OrderRowID>
            <PickedQuantity>1</PickedQuantity>
        </row>
    </PickLists_Lines>
</Payload>
…and the result:
<Payload status="success" id="atom2" Role="C" DImsg=" Exception :
Input values '["3" , "3"]' does not match with expected class names
'["com.sap.smb.sbo.api.ICompany" , "java.lang.Integer"]' for SBO object type '156'"
DIresult="failure" keyvalue="3" keyname="AbsEntry" payload="atom1" objectid="156"
method="Synchronous Update" b1login="Technical User" system="0010000100"/>
I just can’t figure out meaning of the error-message…anyone can help?
Thanks in advance!
Best Regards
Alex

Hey Alex,
I have a similar problem. I suppose you have solved your problem, because this post is very old. Perhaps you could share the solution?
Best regards
Benjamin

GR Value is not matching with PO Value while posting good receipt.

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for