Avoid split invoice header partner

Hello,
I have 2 deliveries with the same "order by"  partner (AG) but different "delivered to" partners (WE) .
SAP generates 2 invoices
In the imputation analysis the reason of this invoice split is due to the delivery address
Do you know how to avoid this split ?
thanks
It is urgent

Hi.
If you are using standard partner determination procedure for billing document header, then check  the copy control of delivery to billing (VTFL). assign routine DATA VBRK/VBRP = 003 "Single Invoice". And if you are using ur own partner determination procedure for billing document header, then check partner determination procedure, where ship to party should not be maintained. ship to party should be available at billing Item level only. result of this header data will not be differs and your invoice will not get splitted.
Rgds
Dhiraj Bhaskar

Similar Messages

  • Avoid invoice split when header partner  is different

    Hi all,
    Here is my requirement. When I am trying to create consolidated invoice  from sales orders using VF01 due the difference in the header partner it is creating invoice split. But the requirement is if the difference partner function is ZU the split should not be created. 
    I am in very urgent need of this solution and please drop relevant and true solutions.
    I will be really greatful if anyone can provide me with a right solution.
    Thanks,
    Varun.

    Hi
    VOFM is the t.code where standard requirements and formulas are written and and available. to write our own requirement or formula ,copy the standard requirement and then write your own . but you need the access key , so take the help of basis people
    Take the help of the ABAPers to write the subroutines and other requirements
    But in your case you dont need any VOFM
    Regards
    Srinath
    Edited by: sri nath on May 1, 2008 9:09 AM

  • Keep Option to avoid splitting 2-line headings?

    I am trying to avoid splitting 2-line headings when using split columns.
    I tried to use "Keep Lines Together", but it does not have any effect - the heading still appears with line 1 at the bottom of column 1 and line 2 at the top of column 2.  I have selected "All Lines in Paragraph".  How do I avoid splitting the heading???

    Actually, the difference between a bug and a limitation is whether or not it works as designed.
    Design is not necessary the way it SHOULD work. Sometimes design is the way it has to work because of whatever reason (most often lack of development resources) -- even if it's recognised as not being ideal or even "correct".
    I'm pretty sure that this falls into the latter category. I believe that the InDesign team made the correct decision to include this feature although it is crippled. The lacking features only affect long docs, and only in certain applications. For newspapers, it works very well as-is.
    Column Flow anyone?
    Harbs

  • Capture the Invoice Split Reason and update it in the invoice header text

    Hi All,
    We have a requirement where we need to capture the invoice split reason and update the reason in the one of the invoice header text.
    Problem is the routine where the split criteria is being determined is called a number of times, so how will we determine at what time of time do we need to capture the split reason. I mean at what iteration of the routine will we know that the split value is the right value.
    Is there any way to determine the number of iterations of a routine written for split?
    Require your valuable inputs for this issue....
    TIA
    Regards,
    Sharadendu

    Hi,
    Is your invoice split reason maintained in the header or item level?
    Try coding your logic in user exit MV45AFZZ and update header text using text id and save it in header text using
    FM [SAVE_TEXT|http://help.sap.com/saphelp_40b/helpdata/en/d6/0db8ef494511d182b70000e829fbfe/content.htm].
    Before this logic use FM [READ_TEXT|http://help.sap.com/saphelp_nw70/helpdata/en/d6/0db8c8494511d182b70000e829fbfe/content.htm] to determine if the header text is already updated. If yes,exit else save your HEADER_TEXT using SAVE_TEXT.
    This code can be written under FORM_USEREXIT_SAVE_DOCUMENT_PREPARE.
    Regards,
    Amit
    Edited by: Amit Iyer on Sep 1, 2009 8:46 PM

  • Probable effects of removing Sold-to from invoice header?

    hi
    we have a requirement of doing collective billing by Payer and for that we need to remove Sold-to partner details from invoice header to avoid billing split.
    We are achieving this by using copy control routine to suppress Sold-to from delivery and (ii) removing Sold-to from header partner procedure of billing type to avoid prevent split due to different Sold-to in preceding documents. (and maintain Sold-to at invoice item level)
    Removing Sold-to from header partner procedure was required as otherwise the split indicator UNGLEICH=X was set and we could not find any user exit to set UNGLEICH = space in program LV60AB14 ( SAP ver 4.7 ).
    While we are trying to assess the effects of removing Sold-to from invoice header, I would lile to know opinion of others about probable effects of doing such; if anybody has done same thing in past, please help.
    thanks in advance

    Hi,
    As such removing sold to from invoice header will not pose any risk to the process. It is very much possible to have an invoice without SP. You can very well do this and go ahead.
    However you can test this by deleting the SP at header level while creating an invoice document on collective basis, and making the payment for the customer. The only place where I have little doubt is about the "Receivables from the customer(sold to party):" in FBL5N. Here we  may have some problems in updating the open items in Receivables and updating the payments. So please do the configuration and test this until payment to find out any errors. Along with this, also run a test on Credit Mngt. If there are no implications in Credit Mngt, and Payments in FI, you are safe to continue this as a process.
    The much simpler way to ensure SP not to be considered for invoice split will be to create a invoice split routine and code in such a way that SP is not a factor for splitting the invoices.
    So evaluate both of them of their advantage and risk and then decide.

  • Transfer data from the PO to the invoice header data in MIRO (user exits)

    Hi.
    We are trying to transfer some basic information from the PO to the invoice header data by the time we process the logistic invoice verification (transaction MIRO).
    The information we want to transfer is:
    1.     PO Text (screen field DRSEG-TXZ01) -
    > should be transferred to Header text field (screen field INVFO-SGTXT) located in the tab u2018Basic Datau2019.
    2.     Purchasing Document Number (screen field DRSEG-EBELN) -
    > should be transferred to Assignment field (screen field INVFO-ZUONR) located in tab u2018Detailsu2019.
    The exits we had listed for this tasks are:
    EXIT_SAPLMR1M_002: Change Proposed Account Assignment
    EXIT_SAPLMR1M_003: Pass On Document Header Data
    EXIT_SAPLMR1M_004: Change the Withholding Tax- and Split Table
    EXIT_SAPLMRMP_010: Analyze Document Header and Item Data
    The second one, EXIT_SAPLMR1M_003, should have stopped at by the time we processed the information, but it didnu2019t.
    Iu2019ve heard EXIT_SAPLMRMP_010 would no longer be functional from version 4.6c.
    Users enter the information in MIRO following this chronological order:
    1.Invoice date
    2.Reference
    3.Purchase order number ---> operation which u201Ccallsu201D the PO to the screen.
    4.Amount
    5.Flag u201Ccalculate taxu201D field (if mandatory)
    6.Tax on sales/purchases code (if mandatory)
    And then they post. Thatu2019s all.
    Weu2019ve tried to get this data from the time we u201Ccallu201D the PO to the screen, just to see if we can get it before we saved the document, and we werenu2019t capable of doing it. The second option is to get the data right after we process the document (post it), so weu2019ve reached bapi INVOICE_UPDATE but we cannot locate the exact place to put the references to the dynpro (although, weu2019re not 100% sure if this bapi would solve the problem).
    Thanks in advance.
    Sebastian

    Hi Sunil.
    Function MRM_INVOICE_CHECK doesn't exist in system 4.6c. Also I've searched for it in ECC 5 and I got the same result. Are you sure about the name of the function?
    From the function group MRMC, I found this:
    MRM_BADI_INVOICE_CHECK    
    MRM_DUPLICATE_INVOICE_CHECK
    I haven't still check them. But for what I know, the second one (...DUPLICATE...) processes a control to avoid a double entry of the invoice, I not sure it will work. I'll let you know.
    Thanks for answering.
    Sebas

  • Is it possible to split invoice Item category wise?

    Is it possible to split invoice Item category wise

    In trx VTFA (if your billing is sales order based) choose your billing type and SO type, there select your item categories and there select the field VBRK/VBRP data. In that field you will see the currently used routine. With the help of your ABAP guy create a copy of that routine under a different number and add your lines of code. Let's say you use routine 001. 
    FORM DATEN_KOPIEREN_001.
    Header data
    VBRK-xxxxx = ............
    Item data
    VBRP-xxxxx = ............
    Additional split criteria
    DATA: BEGIN OF ZUK,
    MODUL(3) VALUE '001',
    VTWEG LIKE VBAK-VTWEG,
    SPART LIKE VBAK-SPART,
    END OF ZUK.
    ZUK-SPART = VBAK-SPART.
    ZUK-VTWEG = VBAK-VTWEG.
    VBRK-ZUKRI = ZUK.
    ENDFORM.
    This is how it should look after modification:
    Header data
    VBRK-xxxxx = ............
    Item data
    VBRP-xxxxx = ............
    Additional split criteria
    DATA: BEGIN OF ZUK,
    MODUL(3) VALUE '001',
    VTWEG LIKE VBAK-VTWEG,
    SPART LIKE VBAK-SPART,
    PSTYV LIKE VBAP-PSTYV,    <- New line
    END OF ZUK.
    ZUK-SPART = VBAK-SPART.
    ZUK-VTWEG = VBAK-VTWEG.
    ZUK-PSTYV = VBAP-PSTYV.   <- New line
    VBRK-ZUKRI = ZUK.
    ENDFORM.
    After this routine is created and activated place it as the default copy control routine instead of the old ones

  • Split-column-header

    Dear BIP’ers
    I have a fine working table using for-each-group@column:current-group(); in one .rtf table cell.
    But now I want to change it into splitting one column as I believe it gives better control over layout.
    UserManual suggest using “split-column-header”
    I found a simple but working example here http://blogs.oracle.com/xmlpublisher/2007/05/01/
    Can you please help me with the syntax:
    Putting <?split-column-header: syntaxsyntax DLE_PNO?>
    Into this:
    <?for-each-group@column:current-group();./DLE_PNO?><?sort:current-group()/DLE_PNO;'ascending';data-type='number'?><?if@inlines:DLE_PNO>’0’?>P<?DLE_PNO?><?end if?><?end for-each-group?>
    Regards Thomas

    Hi Tim
    OK. Great here comes the full problem:
    Copy-paste from the current result in my pdf output converted to fit this forum:
    {color:#0000ff}Work package number: WP 1.11 Start date: Month 17
    Work package title: Experimental challenge of Atlantic salmon
    Activity type: TRA WP Leader: P7
    Participant number: P1 P2 P3 Total
    Participant short name: UMA NSV UTR
    Person months per participant: 7 3 134 144
    Person months not funded: (5) (0) (11) (16)
    {color}-----
    The 3 participants showed above is dynamic changing from 1 to 20 in the repeating work packages.
    The partners must always be showed in one line. The participant short name is written vertical to save space. An rtf template table holds the field codes previously posted in this forum.
    It works fine up to approximately 8 partners, but when more partners the table exceeds the right page border.
    So I would like to set one fixed cell space for the partners and then split cell for each partner like this:
    &lt;?for-each-group:DATATEMPLATE_OB_DLE_ROW;./OB_ID?&gt;&lt;?sort:current-group()/OB_NO_S;'ascending';data-type='number'?&gt;
    &lt;?for-each-group:current-group();./WP_ID?&gt;&lt;?sort:current-group()/WP_NO_S;'ascending';data-type='number'?&gt;
    {color:#0000ff}Work package number: WP 1.11 Start date: Month 17
    Work package title: Experimental challenge of Atlantic salmon
    Activity type: TRA WP Leader: P7{color}
    &lt;?for-each-group@column:current-group();./DLE_PNO?&gt;&lt;?sort:current-group()/DLE_PNO;'ascending';data-type='number'?&gt;&lt;?if@inlines:DLE_PNO&gt;&rsquo;0&rsquo; ?&gt;P&lt;?DLE_PNO?&gt;&lt;?end if?&gt;&lt;?end for-each-group?&gt;
    split-column-header ?
    {color:#0000ff}Participant number:..... P1..... P2..... P3 .....Total
    Participant short name: .....UMA .....NSV .....UTR
    Person months per participant: .....7 .....3 .....134..... 144
    Person months not funded:..... (5) .....(0)..... (11)..... (16){color}
    Here are some more details:
    The table contains a number of groupings before the actial partner table
    XML sample:
    &lt;DATATEMPLATE_OB_DLE_ROW&gt;
    &lt;OB_ID&gt;3&lt;/OB_ID&gt;
    &lt;OB_NO_S&gt;1&lt;/OB_NO_S&gt;
    &lt;OB_TITLE&gt;Establish a functional relationship in immune response profiles&lt;/OB_TITLE&gt;
    &lt;WP_ID&gt;15&lt;/WP_ID&gt;
    &lt;WP_OB_NO_S&gt;1&lt;/WP_OB_NO_S&gt;
    &lt;WP_NO_S&gt;14&lt;/WP_NO_S&gt;
    &lt;WP_TI&gt; Experimental challenge of Atlantic salmon&lt;/WP_TI&gt;
    &lt;CALC_WP_PNO&gt;P7&lt;/CALC_WP_PNO&gt;
    &lt;CALC_WP_PDU&gt;17&lt;/CALC_WP_PDU&gt;
    &lt;WP_ACT_TY&gt;TRA&lt;/WP_ACT_TY&gt;
    &lt;DL_ID&gt;39&lt;/DL_ID&gt;
    &lt;DL_WPO_ID&gt;19&lt;/DL_WPO_ID&gt;
    &lt;DLE_PNO&gt;1&lt;/DLE_PNO&gt;
    &lt;DLE_SHORT&gt;UMA&lt;/DLE_SHORT&gt;
    &lt;DLE_EPM&gt;7&lt;/DLE_EPM&gt;
    &lt;DLE_EPMO&gt;5&lt;/DLE_EPMO&gt;
    &lt;/DATATEMPLATE_OB_DLE_ROW&gt;
    Looking forward the see your input ;-)
    Best regards Thomas

  • Header partner disabled (billing)

    Hello,
    When an invoice is created, the Header partner appears disabled. Is it a normal behaviour? I have customized the RE partner (Bill-to party) to make it editable (Sales and Distribution->Basic Functions->Partner Determination->Set up partner Determination for Billing Header), but it does not works (entire table appears disabled).
    Thanks in advance,
    Ricard.

    Hi Oscar,
    In the invoice you should be able to see the header partner functions.
    So that's not normal.
    May I ask what is the business reason not to stick with standard partner functions in billing?
    IMHO Billing should be a more or less automatic process in SAP based on delivery data (delivery based billing) or credit note data (sales document based billing), therefore it does not seem to be a good idea to have the RE partner editable in the invoice.
    In general the partner function in billing should be determined from original document (sales order or credit note) and modified there in case of needing to do it.
    Best Regards,
    Franck

  • Issue in Split invoicing

    Hi,
    I have an issue in split invoicing.
    Here is the scenario:
    If we have indicated purchase condition for split invoicing (for
    example excise tax) we dont want to post them to inventory , i
    want to configure an offset condition .In the system i configred
    2 cond type for +ve and -Ve.Also configured Act key and Accruals
    I used AltCty 409 but i do not get the result..
    So Can anyone tell me that how to configure in condition type and
    how it works....
    Thanks in advance.
    Nitin

    Hi.
    Do not use the alternate condition formula for alternative calculation type. Already you have used the account key and accrual key.
    You can use either of the one.
    Either you can use accrue key or account key.
    Accrual key generally used for freight and freight related cost.
    I would suggest use the account key and you need to assign the account key to the condition type in the OB40.
    Try this it may resolve your issue. If it helps award me.
    Cheers
    Umakanth.

  • Dunning Block field in Invoice Header

    Hello,
    There is this Dunning Block field in the invoice header tab > Accounting Data sub tab.
    Please let me know how this field value is controlled.  i.e. it gets determined or it flows from some master data?
    Any info on this dunning block field is welcome.
    Thanks,
    Shankar

    Dear Shankar
    If you implement Dunning procedure, this field will be controlled based on the value you maintain in Payer customer master Company Code Data - under Correspondence tab
    thanks
    G. Lakshmipathi

  • Copy Control for Billing Header Partner.

    Hi All,
    Need advice and guidance from all. As below are the explanation of the future and current scenario. I also have did some research on my own. Please advice and thanks in advance.
    Future Scenario:
    A new partner determination is necessary during the creation of the debit note or credit note memo request with reference to the billing document by using transaction to VA01.
    Current Scenario:
    While creating a credit or debit memo request with reference to the billing document the header partner is copied from the reference billing document. But if there is an update in customer master data (VD03) for partner function before creation of credit or debit memo request, the partner function will not be updated in the VBPA table of this routine (FV45C003)
    Steps did by me:
    1) Copied routine 003 (FV45C003) to a new routine.
    2) Manage to find the required table such as KNVP and KNA1 which stores the latest customer master data.
    Question:
    1) Is there any function module that i can overwrite the CVBPA table in the subroutine (FV45C003)?
    Regards
    Shawn

    HI Brad Bohn,
    Thanks for the helpful advice. Appreciate it very much and my apology for the late reply. Have a great day ahead...:)
    Regards
    Shawn

  • Split Invoice in PO

    There is a split invoice indicator in the condition details in the PO Conditions tab. Does anyone know what this is used for?

    Hi,
    With split invoice verification, you can calculate the freight costs and excise duties separate from the material value and the fees for a goods receipt. You can also provide different terms of payment each time.
    Pls refer : http://help.sap.com/saphelp_rc10/helpdata/en/70/23cb4f419311d2ac100000e829fbfe/content.htm
    Regards,
    Chandru

  • Update Header Partner data in a Purchase Order in 4.6C system.

    Hello all,
    I have written a report program to add/update partner data at PO header level.
    The report uses BAPI POCHANGE for the update.
    But the BAPI_PO_CHANGE does not transfer/update Partner Information for the PO's in 4.6 C system.
    The same code functions properly for Purchase Orders in ECC6.0 systems.
    Please provide me some inputs for a probable solution to update PO header partner data in 4.6C system.
    Thanks in advance.

    Hello Hiren,
    Thanks for the prompt response.
    I am populating the structure POPARTNER with partner information.
    And passing header information in POHEADER. i.e the PO Number.
    I have not marked any fields in POHEADERX as 'X'. It still works in ECC6 system.
    But does not work in 4.6C system.
    Thanks in advance.
    Edited by: Amar.t on Mar 7, 2010 12:59 PM

  • How to Add Values in INVOICE SUB-TYPE field at the Invoice Header Forms

    Hello,
    Does any body knows how could I add/modify values in the INVOICE SUB-TYPE field at the Invoice Header Forms?. This values are related to the Globalization, in this case for the Chilean Localizations.
    Thanks,
    Alejandro R.

    It gives any error or just does nothing?
    Have you tried making another simple form with just one block and one or two items?
    You can do this type of testing in these conditions.
    Which version of forms are you using?

Maybe you are looking for