Calculate due on date in incoming invoice based on p.date of purchase order

We would like to calculate due on date in incoming invoice based on posting date of purchase order position. We want to be able to see the posting date of the purchase order lines from miro transaccion. Then we would add 85 days to calculate the due on date. I have tried to create an "item list variant" from OLMRLIST transaccion (Customizing - Logistics invoice verification) and add the posting date but it is not possible to access this value.
Thanks in advance.

Hi,
have a look at badi MRM_PAYMENT_TERMS.
Check as well OSS Note 1156325 - BAdIs in the Logistics Invoice Verification environment
Best regards.

Similar Messages

How to set a default start and/or end date for New Events based on trigger date.

I'm using the CalendarActivityListener to get current row when clicking on an existing event. As per previous posts this listener gives you access to event detail including Start Date, End Date, etc.
However, what I want to do is to default the start (and end) dates for New Events based on the trigger date.
I've tried the CalendarListener and can grab the Trigger Date from it - however, I can't see a way to pass this directly to the popup/dialog I'm using to create the new event.
At present I'm putting the TriggerDate into the ADFContext session scope e.g. ADFContext.getCurrent().getSessionScope().put("TriggerDate",calendarEvent.getTriggerDate());
Then, I've tried multiple approaches to try and "get" the TriggerDate from session scope to drop it into my new Calendar Event basically, I'm trying to default the InputField(s) associated with the Start Date using the value from the session - I've tried
1. setting the default value for the InputField in the jspx using a binding expression i.e. value="#{sessionScope.TriggerDate}" - this actually sets the value appropriately when the jspx is rendered but, when I go to create I get a NPE and I can't debug. I assumed that it might be a Date type issue - it would appear that CalendarListener provides a date of type java.util.Date and that the StartDate attribute of my VO/EO/table is a DATE and therefore requires oracle.jbo.domain.Date so I tried casting it - to no effect
2. Using a Groovy expression *(StartDate==null?adf.context.sessionScope.TriggerDate:StartDate)* in my calendar's EventVO to default the Start Date to the same result
Any thoughts or ideas?

John,
Thanks for that suggestion - could not get it to work. However, I did manage a different approach. I finally determined the sequence of events in terms of how the various events and listeners fire (I think).
Basically, the CalendarActivityListener fires, followed by the listener associated with the Calendar object's Create facet, followed finally by the CalendarEventListener - the final is where the TriggerEvent is available and then finally, control is passed to the popup/dialog in the Create facet. So, my approach of trying to set/get the TriggerDate in the user's HTTP session was doomed to failure because it was being get before it had been set :(
Anyway, I ended up adding a bit of code to the CalendarEvent listener - it grabs the current BindingContext, navigates through the DCBindingContainer to derive an Iterator for the ViewObject which drives the calendar and then grabs the currently active row. I then do a few tests to make sure we're working with a "new" row because I don't want to alter start & end dates associated with an existing calendar entry and then I define the Start and End dates to be the Trigger Date.
Works just fine. Snippet from the listener follows
BindingContext bindingContext = BindingContext.getCurrent();+
*if ( bindingContext != null ) {*+
DCBindingContainer dcBindings = (DCBindingContainer) bindingContext.getCurrentBindingsEntry();+
DCIteratorBinding iterator = dcBindings.findIteratorBinding("EventsView1Iterator");+
Row currentRow = iterator.getCurrentRow();+
if ( currentRow.getAttribute("StartDate") == null)+
currentRow.setAttribute("StartDate", calendarEvent.getTriggerDate());+
if (currentRow.getAttribute("EndDate")==null)+
currentRow.setAttribute("EndDate", calendarEvent.getTriggerDate());+
*}*

GR Based IV tick for Import Purchase Order

Hello Friends
Whats the significance of keeping GR based IV check box as unchecked for import purchase order.I am selecting this indicator and still i am able to do the process as follows
1. ME21n 2. MIRO (BOE capturing) 3. MIGO 4. Post Excise invoice 4. MIRO (Material Vendor)
Still could not understand why this indicator is suggested to keep as unchecked for import purchase order processing.
Please clarify.
Regards
Vivek sharma

Hi
For import POs , it is required that the GRbased Inv ver key removed, as we need to pay the amount due to the customs. We are yet to receive the material in our Goodown i.e goods receipt is yet to be done but payment to Customs has to be made only then material GR can be carried out. You have to enter manula values(amounts) for this to be processed. What you said reg the MIRO rpocessing evenefore Material receipt, this is possible , duirng MIRO you need to anter the quanity and the correspondingamount to be processed. While if you have GRbased Inv.verification then you need not enter material quanity or value manually which is automatic.
Regards

GR Based INV flag set on Purchase Order

Hello,
We are on SRM 5.5 and R3 ECC 6.0 classic scenario. We want to swihtch off the GR Based Invoice flag which is maintained in de vendor master. Vendor has no info record or contract. When creating a PO directly in R3 the flag is also disabled on the PO. However, when we create a shopping cart, the system automatically creates the purchase req and when the purchaser creates the Purchase order the GR Based Inv. flag is set again ? Can anybody let me know how this is possible ?
Thanks as eve for your help.
Antoinette

Hi Antoinette Stork,
Here is the way we have achieved. I am not an ABAPer and hence providing you more concepts than code.
01) A custom program is written and is scheduled on hourly basis as a back ground job.
02) This program is executed after the BBP_VENDOR_SYNC is executed as a background job as well.
03) BBP_VENDOR_SYNC will bring the updates and new vendors from the R/3 back end.
04) This will bring the vendors with the confirmation flag set on SRM (no corresponding field exists on the R/3 side vendor master) and also will check the GR based invoice verification flag on (the corresponding field exists on the ECC vendor master).
05) After 15 minutes the custom program will read the BUT000 table for the total number of vendors changed or created between two successive jobs.
06) Then query on the VENMAP table to get the GUIDs of the corresponding vendors.
07) Within the custom program use the FMs
     BBP_BUPA_FRG0060_CHANGE and
     BAPI_TRANSACTION_COMMIT
to set the flags for
      goodsrec_confex = ' ' and
      GR_BASEDIV
Sorry for being unable to provide you the code dump. This is working perfectly fine for us.
Also, we have used the badi "BBP_ECS_PO_OUT_BADI" with the method "BBP_B46B_PO_OUTBOUND" as a safety net as our invoice processing is two way match and we do not absolutely want the flags to be set to the R/3 PO.
DATA: ls_bapi_poitem TYPE bbps_if_bapimepoitem_pi.
Loop through the item details that gets passed to Backend*
LOOP AT ct_bapi_poitem INTO ls_bapi_poitem.
Clear the GR and GR-Based Invoice Verification Indicator.*
    CLEAR : ls_bapi_poitem-gr_ind,
            ls_bapi_poitem-gr_basediv.
    MODIFY ct_bapi_poitem FROM ls_bapi_poitem
           TRANSPORTING gr_ind gr_basediv.
ENDLOOP.
ENDMETHOD.
Hope this helps,
DV

Invoice non deductible tax amount vs Purchase order

In the purchase order the tax amount is calculated item by item (ME21N). In the invoice (MIRO) when we select flag Calculate tax the system calculates the tax amount for the total of all the items. Because of this system behaviour in the invoice verification sometimes we obtain small differences.
These differences should not exist specially when we are using a non deductible tax that affects the material valuation with the goods receipt and has to be corrected in the moment of the invoice verification.
Why does the system have a different behaviour from the purchase order to the invoice?
What can be done?
Best regards

Dear Biju K
Whatever you mentioned about condition NAVS is there in system.
I am not adding tax code in PO, referring your earlier email I am asking that.
For adding other element I have not asked anything here, only to clarify your statement
You need to cross check why non-deductible tax amount needed in your PO with NAVS condition type and its purpose.
I explained this.
My question is simple that in one PO I am getting non-deductible tax but if I change vendor for the same material I am not getting non-deductible tax in condition tab ? I am not able to understand why its happened ? If one PO shows means there are chances that basic configuration is correct but may be somewhere something is wrong, I want to find out that. If you can throw some light on that its helpful for me.
regards
Nitin

Generating Inbound delivery based on Vendor Confirmation for Purchase order

Is there a way to create Inbound deliveries based on Vendor confirmation for a purchase order.
Here is the complete scenario.
Buyer Creates the PO for qty 100 and Date August 29
Vendor Confirms that he can supply a qty of 50 for August 29 and remaining 50 for Sep15th
Based on vendor confirmation, Buyer creates 2 vendor confirmations (AB) to match with the data received from Buyer, without modifing the PO.
Requirement:
Inbound deliveries should get created based on the vendor confirmation.
As MRP looks at Inbound delivery for Planning purposes once they are available, Inbound delivery should match with vendor confirmation data.
Is it possible to get this requirement met with standard config available in SAP.

could you eventually get the answer from the docu Set Up Confirmation Control

How to determine output based on the content of purchase order

Hi Gurus,
I've a typical requirement at my present project. With vendor X we have punchout catalogs. while creation of shopping cart, we are not allowing the user to mix catalog items and non catalog items into the same shopping cart. Once the shopping cart all shopping carts are automatically coverted into PO.
Now the challenge we are facing is, if the PO is created based on items from catalog, we want to send such PO via XML interface to the vendor. If the PO is created based of items which are free-form, we want to send such PO via Smartform email attachment.
As this condition can only be determined at runtime, I'm finding a challenge to configure this. In both PO cases, vendor is same but the content of the PO is different. One contains all items that are catalog based and other contains items which are non catalog.
Can someone help me find solution for this issue.
Regards,
Sam K

Change Forms for Document Output
You can use the Business Add-In BBP_OUTPUT_CHANGE_SF to override the Smart Forms that are defined in the activity Define Actions for Document Output.
This BAdI serves as an alternative to the IMG activity Condition-Dependent Document Output.
Note that no Smart Forms are used for output via XML.
Standard settings
The following parameters are available in the method CHANGE_FORMS. Depending on the input parameters, you can define other Smart Forms to output the document type.
Importing
IV_GUID
Globally Unique Identifier of the document.
IV_MEDIUM
Output medium found for this document according to Define Actions for Document Output (print: PRN, fax: FAX, e-mail: MAI, XML: MET).
IS_PARTNER
Business partner to whom the document is sent.
IV_OBJECT_TYPE
Business transaction type.
Changing
CV_SMARTFORM
Smart Form used to output the document.
E-mail output
Smart Form with which the document is added to the e-mail in the form of a PDF attachment.
Note:
Note that the BAdI with this parameter overrides the parameter form name (technical name of the Smart Form BBP_PO for example) irrespective of the defined determination technology (SRM: Purchase Order Output Determination, for example).
CV_SMARTFORM_MAIL
Smart Form used to define content and layout of the e-mail text in the case of e-mail output.
CV_SUBJECT_MAIL
Smart Form that determines the text in the (short description of the e-mail content).
As an alternative to this BAdI, you can control document output via determination technology.
For more information, see Condition-Dependent Document Output.
EXPLORE THIS badi

Deactivate Invoicing (MIR7 and MIR4) in a Purchase Order

Hi SAP Experts,
We have Purchase Orders (PO) for service (construction of building) to a vendor (contractor). We are using the Goods Receipt (MIGO) to receive the percentage accomplishment. However, we are using an ABAP program for invoicing instead of (MIR7 u2013 parking of invoice and MIR4 u2013 posting of invoice) since we pay a down payment to the vendor and we also have a retention amount. Our problem is if we use the ABAP program for invoicing to process payment, we can process it again using MIR7 and MIR4, which may result to double payment to the contractor. Is there a way where we can receive the goods (MIGO) and deactivate parking and posting of invoices (MIR7 and MIR4 respectively)?
Thanks,
Matt

Hi vaishali gupta,
Thanks for the advise. We ticked the final invoice and it did not let us invoice the PO using MIR7 and MIR4 and our ABAP program. However, we still need to issue an invoice using the ABAP program that we created. Is there another way where we can use our ABAP program to invoice the PO and at the same time, cannot be invoiced using MIR7 and MIR4?
Also, when we ticked the Final Invoice, when we made a goods receipt, the amount that was received became 0.00.
Thanks,
Matt
Edited by: chuamatt on Mar 6, 2012 1:54 AM
Edited by: chuamatt on Mar 6, 2012 2:09 AM
Edited by: chuamatt on Mar 6, 2012 2:14 AM

Invoice Verification without GR and with Purchase Order

Hi all
During the Logistic Invoice Verfication (MIRO) without GR and with Purchase Order, I want to exclude "Invoice to be received" account (WRX) from the posting. How can I do it?
Let me know
Thanks

it doesn't work. Can you explain me better the solution?
Thanks

How to report Invoice details and also the related Purchase order details

Hello,
Any suggestions on How to Report both Invoice details and the related Purchase Order details.
Ex:
INvoice Line items Amounts /Qty
PO Line Items Amounts /Qty
Thanks in advance
Jagadish

Hello,
Any suggestions on How to Report both Invoice details and the related Purchase Order details.
Ex:
INvoice Line items Amounts /Qty
PO Line Items Amounts /Qty
Thanks in advance
Jagadish

Count of Receipts,Invoices in PO cycle for a purchase order

Hi All,
Can anyone give me the query to count the Receipts 'number of Receipt number' and invoices 'count of invoice_num' for a single purchase order in Po Cycle ASAP. For example in purchase order summary screen you can view all the invoices and receipt details.
Warm Regards,
Anjan.

Hi All,
Can anyone give me the query to count the Receipts 'number of Receipt number' and invoices 'count of invoice_num' for a single purchase order in Po Cycle ASAP. For example in purchase order summary screen you can view all the invoices and receipt details.
Warm Regards,
Anjan.

Automatic Update of Dates in the Transaction based on the date rule assigne

Hi Friends,
This might sound very basic but, it is a major issue at the moment in our project
I have a date type Today-20 days
I have created a Date rule Today-20 days
and assigned to the Date type and then to the Date profile and the date profile to the Transaction type
when i create an Opportunity it takes the system date as Todays date and the Today-20 days is also calculated correctly.
Till now everything is fine.
But the next day when i open and see the opportunity the Todays date is still the system date from yesterday and also the Today-20 days is the same what i saw yesterday
Unless i explicitly click and change something in the dates, they dont refresh automatically
I need a mechanism to trigger the automatic update of dates in the Business Transactions
so as to trigger an action if an opportunity is open but not touched for 20 days
Any advise would be appreciated and rewared as points.
Thanks and Regards,
Raj

Hi Raj
As any other determination the date determination takes only place as long as no dates are filled. It is triggered then only after dates are changed.
Nevertheless your szenario sounds a bit strange to me: What is the sense of always having the actual date / actual date -20 days in the date scheme? As this can easily be calculated on request you do not put this into the date scheme; only information that stays over time is put in schemes (and saved along with the opportunity main data in the DB).
So if you want to stay with the concept the only thing you can do is to re-trigger the date determination of the opportunity by e.g. modifying the dates whenever you are changing / saving the opportunty. This can be done in the ORDER_SAVE badi or in an event (search the CRMC_EVENT_CALL table for an appropriate one). In both cases you need to code some lines of ABAP though.
Hope this helps,
Kai

Difference in GR and invoice posting Prices with respct to Purchase Order

Dear All,
We have facing a problem while posing a MIRO for our client . The background is as follows for the Import PO (Document currency is GBP)
1) Rate of Exchange is 1 Euro = 0.84260 GBP....for August 2010 maintained in OB08
2) PO Rate for item A is 4.077 Euro/ Kg...PO qty is 1090 Kg...PO Date 05.08.2010
3) When GR was posted system post Amount at 2323.64 GBP (or 2757.70 Euro).....GR date 16.08.2010
4) GR Value should be 3744.4777 GBP ( or 4443.93 EURO)...which is appear when we post MIRO..
My question is from where system picks this rate i.e. (2.53 Euro or 2.1318 GBP per Kg)....No info record maintained and rate in material master at the time or GR is 1.7986 per Kg..Kindly help me to find out problem...
Regards
Sachin

Hi ,
Please check the following,
1. Is the Exchange rate in PO is fixed or not
2. When is the GR carried out before invoice or after invoice?
Please let me know the above information
Also check Note: 399906
Regards
Senthilnathan
Edited by: Senthil Nathan on Sep 16, 2010 12:10 PM

Avoid posting mm-incoming invoice with when special account is used

Hi,
during the creation of the (parked) incoming invoice we use a dummy account that needs to be changed later. For our process it is not simply done by customize the account in the way that posting is not allowed.
Therefore I am searching a possibilty to reject the posting of an mm incoming invoice if one special account is used. For the FI-incoming invoices I solved the problem with validation rules (User exits to avoid posting of invoices)
But how can I do this with the mm invoices? Is it extension LMR1M005 or LMR1M004? (Didn't get it with them because I don't know how a "posting" switch should look like in the coding)
Regards, Vanessa

Hi,
Your PO created for real vendor/account and Why you parked incoming invoice to a dummy account ?
Purchase order considered as committed document by business and you are doing invoice verification( parking and posting) WRT purchase order for a vendor and respective accounting documents are created during goods receipt and invoice verification-why you want to post to dummy account/vendor!
Instead of development , you can try with following:
1.Create Main Vendor (A)in t.code:XK01
2.Go for creating a new vendor master(B) for dummy vendor in XK01 , keep alternate payee as main vendor(A) as Alternat.payee field in Payment transaction view and keep partner function as Invoicing Party(PI) only in Partner function view.
3. Assign this dummy vendor code(B) in Main vendor(A) in t.code:XK02 with partner function of Invoicing Party in Partner function view.
4.Now create PO for Main vendor(A)
5.Do invoice verification for PO, your invoice posted to dummy vendor code(B)
6.Do payment for PO where you will pay for vendor code (A)
Also you can think following options:
Better create assign a blocking key in field of Payment block in Payment transaction view of your vendor master and after invoice verification, the invoice document created will be blocked for vendor.Later you can release the invoice with MRBR t.code or FB02 t.code.
OR
You can use tolerance limit as ZERO for tolerance keys for invoice verification for your company code. Create PO for vendor and after invoice verification for PO, the invoice document created will be blocked for vendor.Later you can release the invoice with t.codes MRBR or FB02.
Regards,
Biju K

Running Aging reports based on Document date in 2007

Hi All,
I have an issue while running the Receivables aging report in the 2007 version. The customer usually runs the reports based on the document date. Document date holds more importance in their case.
However, in the 2007 version, the aging report is totally governed by the posting date. For example, if I change the aging date, the posting date also changes to the aging date and viceversa. If I want to change the aging date to 01/31/09, the posting date u2018Tou2019 automatically changes to 01/31/09 and when we run the report, it will bring in all transactions until the posting date of 01/31/09.
But, the requirement is to leave the posting date as blank and give the document date u2018Tou2019 01/31/09. This will then pull all transactions until the document date of 01/31/09 irrespective of the posting date.
As a result, when you run the balance sheet with the document date of 01/31/09, receivables show a different balance. This discrepancy is due to the fact that AR Receivable aging report forces to keep the Aging date = Posting date.
This was not the case in SAP 2005 version where we were allowed to key in the aging date and the document date to get results based on document date.
This is very critical as they have recently upgraded from 2005 to 2007 and they are unable to reconcile the balances out of Balance sheet and Aging.
Please advise.
Thanks,
Payal

Hi Jitin,
We tried that as well but no luck. There is still a discrepency between what the aging shows and what the BS shows. When we put the Aging date as 01/31/09 and Document date as 01/3109, the posting date 'To' is automatically filled with 01/31/09, so it basically searches for all transactions with the posting date 01/31/09 and document date 01/31/09. This is not the requirement as we do not want to consider the posting date at all while running the aging.
I also have some screenshots if I can share. I am not sure if I should report this to SAP for further investigation or am I missing something here.
Thanks for your help.
Regards,
Payal
Edited by: Rui Pereira on May 1, 2009 10:48 AM

Calculate due on date in incoming invoice based on p.date of purchase order

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for