MIRO Invoice - Testing for INVOIC02 in EDI scenario

Dear Experts,
I am doing a scenario for testing the inbound process for Invoice ( MM ).
( Sending system is LS of XI and receiving system is LS of R/3)
If any body has done this test idoc prcoessing for the scenario, i need your valuable help in how to go about this.
In simple, how to do the WE19 for MM invoice verification.
When I am doing the test scenario, I am getting an error.
LS 'Vendor No' company code not maintained.
But if I go to OBCA there no LS for Vendor.
So, can anyone guide me what should be the value for the below segment E1EDKA1 ( PARVW and PARTN) .
Also the value for the segment E1EDK14 .
If any one provide me moredetails about this , i would be grateful to you.
Regards
RAj

Self Resolved. Config missing in OBCA

Similar Messages

MIRO invoice verification for Service entry sheet

When trying to do invoice verification for Service entry sheet i am getting this below error pls guide me
Delivery note/service entry sheet 5000000150 does not exist
Message no. M8183

Hi,
You may be saves SES number and now SES is not released!
1st Just cross check PO history TAB of service PO(ME23N), did you have only service entry sheet number or you have service entry sheet number and material document( will be created after releasing SES) with 101 movement type.
You have created service entry sheet (SES) in ML81N and got SES number, so as to recognize the vendor performed service. Next step, you need to accept service by releasing SES( in ML81N by clicking green flag or if release strategy there for SES, you need to release SES in ML85) so that FI document will be created.
Once SES released, then you can do MIRO w.r.t SES only.
Check doc:
http://help.sap.com/bp_bl604/BBLibrary/Documentation/209_BPP_EN_FI.doc
Regards,
Biju K

Unlimited MIRO invoice allowed for GR based IV item

Hi,
I have a problem where the user keeps posting invoices against incorrect Service ENtry Sheets(SES). The user wants to know if there is a message which can be given at this point.
PO item is a service
The flag for GR based IV is set.
The following processing has been done.
PO qty: 45600
1) SES1 - Amount 11400
2) GR1 against SES1
Dr      expense            11,400
Cr      GR/IR Clearing     -11,400
3) IR1 - Amount 4,998.15 against SES1
Cr      Vendor          -4,998.15
Dr     GR/IR Clearing     11,400
Cr     Expense          -6,401.85
At this point, the GR/IR clearing account has been cleared and the expense account entries have also been nullified.
So the effective posting in FI will be as follows:
Cr      Vendor          -4,998.15
Dr      expense            (11,400-6401.85) = 4998.15
At this point, if I try to create an invoice using MIRO wrt the same PO item, it still allows me to post an invoice of 6401.85 as the difference between the GR amount and the IR amount still exists.
The invoice is not even set for blocking.
However, FI wise, there is no pending invoice for this item.
The users do not want this scenario to be allowed. Can anyone suggest how this can be prevented.
If I do post this invoice at this stage, it creates the following FI entries.
Cr     Vendor          - 6401.85
Dr     Expense            6401.85
After this, any further invoices on this PO item are blocked for payment.
Please help as this scenario keeps on occuring for service items and becomes a mess for items having multiple SES.
Let me know if further inputs are required.
Thanks!
PM

Hello Sudhir,
Thanks for your response. However, in this case, the quantity has not been exceeded.
If you notice, the IRd amount(4998.15) is still less than the GRd amount(11400) in the PO history.
However, the postings have been cleraed at the FI document level.
The checks that you have mentioned get hit only after the IR amount crosses the GR amount of 11400 and then th einvoice goes into payment block. Which is correct.
Please let me know if you have further suggestions or if I have understood your response incorrectly.
Thanks!
PM

MIRO MIGO ENHANCEMENT FOR INDIAN SCENARIO - IMPORTS PURCHASE ORDERS

ENHANCEMENT IN THE MIRO ACTIVITY. IN INDIA YOU HAVE TO POST 7 CUSTOMS CONDITIONS FOR EACH ITEM. MIRO ACTIVITY IS COMPLETELY MANUAL. ALL THE 7 VALUES, QUANTITIES FOR 7 CONDITIONS ARE TO BE ENTERED. CAN THIS BE IMPROVED TO HANDLE IN A BETTER WAY.
MIGO ACTIVITY FOR MANUFACTURING SCENARIO THE EXCISE VALUES ARE SET OFF WHICH ARE RETRIEVED BUT FOR TRADING SCENARIO WHERE THE EXCISE CONDITIONS ARE CUSTOMISED [ZCV1, ZEC1, ZEC2, ZAD1] TO LOAD ON INVENTORY THE EXCISE VALUES ARE TO BE ENTERED. CAN THIS ACTIVITY BE ENHANCED SO THAT THESE VALUES COME DIRECTLY FROM THE MIRO FOR DUTY POSTINGS WHERE ALL THE VALUES ARE ENTERED
BEST REGARDS
PANKAJ

Hi,
In a normal import process, before the goods receipt, you are making invoice verification for Customs using MIRO and using Planned delivery costs as an option.
As the goods receipts doesn't exist, system is not proposing Customs conditions
As the goods receipts quantity is unknown and there always a possibility of partial invoice verification for the customs, system will not directly populate the values in MIRO.
Doing enhancements to populate this values may not be needed. Pls convince the user on the import process.
Any other option available for that, really dont know
Thanks

Regarding Tolerance Keys for Invoice Block For Payment in MIRO

Hi all,
In customizing, I have defined Tolerance Keys for Invoice Block for Payment. I have defined all tolerance keys for my company code ...... with Absolute as well as Percentage Limits. But whenever I am doing MIRO & testing for my Block Codes effectiveness, i am finding that everytime my Invoice gets Blocked by Tolerance Key PP(Price Variance) or by date......but not by any other like BD, BW, KW etc. Can anyone help me as how I should check for this. I even tried to study the documentation part available in customizing, but was unable to understand the term like Order Price Quantity units.......Can anyone help me in understanding this thing ........
Regards.....

Hi Ganesh,
below is the user exit where you can check the tolarance and put the Block according to the your requirment.
User Exit name - MM08R002 -User exit for tolerance checks
in the above user exit you have to use the below Function exit.
1) EXIT_SAPLMRMC_001
2) EXIT_SAPLMRMP_001
we implemented the above user exit to put the payment block based on the checks.
You can find the documentation of the above exit in the system.
Thanks
Naresh

Auto router release in AP Invoice Test Scenario

Hi Gurus,
Please guide me how to prepare test script for Auto router release in AP Invoice Test Scenario.
Thanks for the Support.
Regards,
Bapu

hi,
It can be auto released only in the following case:
Original PO - 500$
When you have the IR for 1000$..
case 1:
You make the changes in the PO and give price as 1000$...
Or...
Case 2.. make the subsequent credit in the mean time for 500$..
So after this when you visit the MRBR tcode, system will auto release it...and the reasons becomes invalid over a time period...
Regards
Priyanka.P

EDI invoice failed for Service- multiple tax code at service item level

Hi Guys,
Please understand below scenarios, it is very critical to our client.
purchase order has 3 parent
line item which having the 3 services with tax code (P1-P1-P1 and P2-P2-P2 and (P2-P1-C1)
(P1=10%, P2=10% and C1=10%)
PO Outbound Idoc -
Similar tax codes(P1-P1-p1 and P2-P2-P2) - Carries total tax amount and
tax rate at parent level also it carries indvidual service line item
tax amount and tax rate at service item level
Mulitple tax codes(P2-P1-C1)- Carries only total tax amount at parent
level and no tax rate at parent level. It carries indvidual service
line item tax amount and tax rate at service item level
SES Outbound Idoc -
Similar tax codes(P1-P1-p1 and P2-P2-P2) - Carries total tax amount at
parent level segment and tax rate at parent item level also it carries
indvidual service line item tax amount and tax rate at service item
level
Mulitple tax codes(P2-P1-C1)- Carries only total tax amount at parent
level and no tax rate at parent level. It carries indvidual service
line item tax amount and tax rate at service item level
But while creating the invoice for parent line item which includes 3
services, it carries correct tax amount(as per PO and SESR) but it is
asking for tax rate at parent level not at service item level.
It is working fine for similar tax code at service line item (e.g P1-P1-p1 for 3 services or P2-P2-P2 for all 3 services) but when we use the combination of tax code or multiple tax code at service line items (e.g. P2-P1-C1), the inbound Idoc gets failed.
Expectation - How EDI invoice posted for mulitple Services under one parent line item which having multiple tax codes at service item level
Thanks
Sanjay
9930851236

This is an ongoing problem with lots of clients - did anyone solve it ?

Payment Method not in F110 for MIRO invoices

Good day all
One of our company codes are experiencing the following problem.
1. The payment method is maintained in the vendor master.
2. When doing a FB60 (sundry invoice) and the F110 (automatic payment) the payment program picks up the invoice for payment and all 100%.
3. When doing a MIRO (LIV invoice) and then F110, the payment program issues error that no valid payment method is found for the MIRO invoice.
4. This is happening on the same vendor account.
What can the reason be that the payment program picks up the payment method for the sundry invoice but not for the MIRO invoice?
Any advice or ideas?
Thank you all.
Lu.

Hi Reema,
I also faced similar problem earlier. Following could be the reasons:(These worked for me)
1. The vendor is already picked up in an earlier run and that run is not fully processed.
2. The amount is not yet due
3. Sometimes, if the address in the vendor master is not fully updated, it fails to pick it up. This usually happens if you have enabled jurisdiction codes etc
Hope this helps
Regards,

TDS adjustment for MIRO Invoice MM Period Closed.

Hi Experts,
We Have got issue wrt TDS entry in the system.
Our client plant has entered downpayments for a vendor and deducted TDS on the same for the Period from Sep 11 to Dec 11
The HO has already remitted the TDS Payments to the Government. (Outside the system)
Meanwhile the MM Period is closed for the Period from Sep 11 to Dec 11 ( the Current Period Open are Jan 12 and Feb 12)
Now they want to post MIRO Invoices in the system, but as the MM Period is closed they can enter invoices only for the current period.
How can they adjust the TDS amount posted against downpayment and MIRO Invoice ?
also should they not deduct any TDS on MIRO Invoice or Deduct TDS and Adjust the invoice using F-54 ?
Also should we make remittance challan in the system for Sep 11 ?
Awaiting your reply.
Regards
Gautam.

Hi,
You will Go to SE16 give table name MARV enter, select your company code XXXX, Execute & select your client XXX and F2 and go to command box enter /h press enter twice and go to menu path select debugger and select switch to classic debugger Double click on "if code", you will be provide with "if code and show, remove show and give EDIT and press F8 (execute), you will be displayed with delete entry button, and click on delete entry button and save
and go to OMSY And chose your company code select your required period , year and save
Thanks,
Raviteja

Payment blocking for MIRO invoice.

Hi,
    We Need to build Payment release workflow for MIRO invoice.
    If the invoice amount exceeds 10000, that line item need to be blocked and shoudl be sent a mail for approval.
    My doubt is, whether the payment blocking is done by configuration settings or will workflow take care of that one?
    Requirement is, line item should be blocked automatically while posting the doc in MIRO.
    If it can be done by configuration, could anybody suggest the path to do so.
    Thanks,
    Shyam.

I would try another SDN forum.

Trigger workflow for MIRO invoice creation

Hello,
In standard functionning it is not possible to trigger the workflow for documents coming from MM.
When using transaction MIRO and selecting invoice creation the created document has following value :
BKPF-AWTYP = 'RMRP'. whereas creating it from FB60 results to BKPF-AWTYP = 'BKPF'.
The problem is standard code checks AWTYP is not equal to 'RMRP' before creating event to start the standard workflow for invoice validation.
Question : why sap doesn't allow workflow creation for invoices from MIRO?
Thanks for your answers.
Best regards,
Laurent.

Hi,
here they are...
WS20000397 MMIVBlockedP Treatment of inv. blkd for price, Log.IV
WS20001004 MMIVToRel Release the Completed Log. IV Document
WS00400026 MMIVquantity Treatment inv.blocked f.quantity reasons
WS20001003 MMIVToCompl Complete the Parked Log. IV Document
WS00400027 MMIVprice Treatment invoic.blocked f.price reasons
All of these workflows are a one-step / one-level of approval and needs some workflow configuration at least for the agent assignments. For a full-blown workflow you should take these workflows as an example, how you could work with it.
The last two workflows work with preliminary posting on the miro (transaction MIR7).
Best regards,
Florin

Two FI documents for one MIRO invoice

Hi,
I would like to now why for some invoices SAP generates two FI documents. For example: I got two FI docs. generated to one invoice, first document has normal line items like almost all FI docs for MIRO invoices but the second one has just two items and it looks like FI document generated in MR21 transaction.
Why system additionally generated price change document ?
regards,
Rafał Pojda

Hi
Check in OMR4 - document types in invoice verification - for transaction MIRO - any additional document type has been maintained. If there is any material revaluation then you can see two separate documents -one for IV and another for revaluation.
Thanks

[svn] 3687: Add some messaging tests for scenarios that involve subscribing to a destination , disconnecting from the channel currently being used and resubscribing to the destination .

Revision: 3687
Author: [email protected]
Date: 2008-10-16 11:23:39 -0700 (Thu, 16 Oct 2008)
Log Message:
Add some messaging tests for scenarios that involve subscribing to a destination, disconnecting from the channel currently being used and resubscribing to the destination. There is an issue that is causing the streaming/multipleDisconnectsResubscribesTest.mxml test to fail that I will log a bug for.
Added Paths:
blazeds/trunk/qa/apps/qa-regress/testsuites/mxunit/tests/messagingService/unsubscribeScen arios/
blazeds/trunk/qa/apps/qa-regress/testsuites/mxunit/tests/messagingService/unsubscribeScen arios/longpolling/
blazeds/trunk/qa/apps/qa-regress/testsuites/mxunit/tests/messagingService/unsubscribeScen arios/longpolling/disconnectResubscribeJMSTest.mxml
blazeds/trunk/qa/apps/qa-regress/testsuites/mxunit/tests/messagingService/unsubscribeScen arios/longpolling/disconnectResubscribeTest.mxml
blazeds/trunk/qa/apps/qa-regress/testsuites/mxunit/tests/messagingService/unsubscribeScen arios/longpolling/multipleDisconnectsResubscribesTest.mxml
blazeds/trunk/qa/apps/qa-regress/testsuites/mxunit/tests/messagingService/unsubscribeScen arios/polling/
blazeds/trunk/qa/apps/qa-regress/testsuites/mxunit/tests/messagingService/unsubscribeScen arios/polling/disconnectResubscribeJMSTest.mxml
blazeds/trunk/qa/apps/qa-regress/testsuites/mxunit/tests/messagingService/unsubscribeScen arios/polling/disconnectResubscribeTest.mxml
blazeds/trunk/qa/apps/qa-regress/testsuites/mxunit/tests/messagingService/unsubscribeScen arios/polling/multipleDisconnectsResubscribesTest.mxml
blazeds/trunk/qa/apps/qa-regress/testsuites/mxunit/tests/messagingService/unsubscribeScen arios/streaming/
blazeds/trunk/qa/apps/qa-regress/testsuites/mxunit/tests/messagingService/unsubscribeScen arios/streaming/disconnectResubscribeJMSTest.mxml
blazeds/trunk/qa/apps/qa-regress/testsuites/mxunit/tests/messagingService/unsubscribeScen arios/streaming/disconnectResubscribeTest.mxml
blazeds/trunk/qa/apps/qa-regress/testsuites/mxunit/tests/messagingService/unsubscribeScen arios/streaming/multipleDisconnectsResubscribesTest.mxml

Revision: 3687
Author: [email protected]
Date: 2008-10-16 11:23:39 -0700 (Thu, 16 Oct 2008)
Log Message:
Add some messaging tests for scenarios that involve subscribing to a destination, disconnecting from the channel currently being used and resubscribing to the destination. There is an issue that is causing the streaming/multipleDisconnectsResubscribesTest.mxml test to fail that I will log a bug for.
Added Paths:
blazeds/trunk/qa/apps/qa-regress/testsuites/mxunit/tests/messagingService/unsubscribeScen arios/
blazeds/trunk/qa/apps/qa-regress/testsuites/mxunit/tests/messagingService/unsubscribeScen arios/longpolling/
blazeds/trunk/qa/apps/qa-regress/testsuites/mxunit/tests/messagingService/unsubscribeScen arios/longpolling/disconnectResubscribeJMSTest.mxml
blazeds/trunk/qa/apps/qa-regress/testsuites/mxunit/tests/messagingService/unsubscribeScen arios/longpolling/disconnectResubscribeTest.mxml
blazeds/trunk/qa/apps/qa-regress/testsuites/mxunit/tests/messagingService/unsubscribeScen arios/longpolling/multipleDisconnectsResubscribesTest.mxml
blazeds/trunk/qa/apps/qa-regress/testsuites/mxunit/tests/messagingService/unsubscribeScen arios/polling/
blazeds/trunk/qa/apps/qa-regress/testsuites/mxunit/tests/messagingService/unsubscribeScen arios/polling/disconnectResubscribeJMSTest.mxml
blazeds/trunk/qa/apps/qa-regress/testsuites/mxunit/tests/messagingService/unsubscribeScen arios/polling/disconnectResubscribeTest.mxml
blazeds/trunk/qa/apps/qa-regress/testsuites/mxunit/tests/messagingService/unsubscribeScen arios/polling/multipleDisconnectsResubscribesTest.mxml
blazeds/trunk/qa/apps/qa-regress/testsuites/mxunit/tests/messagingService/unsubscribeScen arios/streaming/
blazeds/trunk/qa/apps/qa-regress/testsuites/mxunit/tests/messagingService/unsubscribeScen arios/streaming/disconnectResubscribeJMSTest.mxml
blazeds/trunk/qa/apps/qa-regress/testsuites/mxunit/tests/messagingService/unsubscribeScen arios/streaming/disconnectResubscribeTest.mxml
blazeds/trunk/qa/apps/qa-regress/testsuites/mxunit/tests/messagingService/unsubscribeScen arios/streaming/multipleDisconnectsResubscribesTest.mxml

Flat file for MIRO Invoice Upload

Hi,
Please any one can send flatfile for MIRO Invoice Upload to this mail id.
[email protected]
Thanks,
Kranti

hi pavan,
The flat file ur asking for should be provided by ur func cons.
According to the file u can do a recording and capture the fields provided and then upload it using LSMW or BDC according to ur comfortable areas.
Reward points if helpful.
regards,
Sumanjeet.

Follow-on documents are not visible in MIRO in TEST server, awsys = PRD300.

Dear Experts ,
The Test Server was refreshed around mid-June 2011 with data of
Production Server. The follow-on documents are not visible for the
invoice documents in MIRO in TEST server due to value in tables
BKPF,RBKP : field : AWSYS = PRD300 .
The newly created Purchase Orders after the refresh, the accounting
documents can be seen for the Goods Receipt (MIGO_GR-display) and
Invoice documents (MIRO).
we had already raised this issue in March & got the feedback from SAP
as shown below.
accordingly we have developed & run the program "zzlogsys2" which
updates the Logsys/Awsys field from PRD300 ( of production server ) to
that of the current server i.e. TST300 as required.
after which the FI documents for the material documents are visible in
MIGO,but follow-on documents are not visible for the invoice documents
in MIRO.
we have Checked notes 781498 and 28958 to see if the logical system is
correctly assigned , where we found that in table RBKP after entering document number, Fiscal Year , the
Field AWSYS is "PRD300" & not "TST300" as it should be. We will take up the activity of updating table RBKP
also as we are currently doing for tables MKPF & BKPF.
But to have clear picture as to what we are doing is correct , pl
advise about the following :
1) Is it a correct process done by our SAP-Basis team , that every time
any Server ( e.g. Test or Quality ) is refreshed with Production server
data, the Field AWSYS in various transaction tables gets value as
"PRD300" which then is required to replaced by running program such as
ZZlogsys.
REPORT ZZLOGSYS.
TABLES: T000, MKPF.
DATA: NEW_SYS LIKE MKPF-AWSYS.
PARAMETER: OLD_SYS LIKE MKPF-AWSYS.
SELECT SINGLE * FROM T000 WHERE MANDT EQ SY-MANDT.
NEW_SYS = T000-LOGSYS.
CHECK NOT NEW_SYS IS INITIAL.
UPDATE MKPF SET AWSYS = NEW_SYS
WHERE AWSYS = OLD_SYS.
WRITE:/ 'Number of updates: ', SY-DBCNT.
2) if the above process is correct & normal , then which are the other
tables in a particular server ,apart from tables MKPF,BKPF,RBKP , which
needs to be updated the value of field "AWSYS" in the same way
replacing value "PRD300".
3) if the process in point no. 1 is not correct , then what is the
correct process that the Basis team can do while refreshing any target
server with production data so that target server retains its value in
Field AWSYS & not showing "PRD300".
With 3 servers TEST,DEV & Quality , recently refreshed with production
server to bring all servers in Sync for a HR patch application, we have
this situation now in all 3 servers .
Thanks in advance ,
Anil Shanbhag

It is appropriate to move this thread from ERP-MM to [Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)|Enterprise Resource Planning (SAP ERP);
Edited by: Jeyakanthan A on Jul 7, 2011 4:56 PM

MIRO Invoice - Testing for INVOIC02 in EDI scenario

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for