MIRO posted without capturing RG23 PART 2 entry

Hi all,
In this scenario, goods receipt is posted and the RG23A Part 1 entry is captured in GR. Now i am posting MIRO without posting RG23A PART 2 entry.
System allows to post MIRO without posting the RG23A Part 2 entry and doesn't issue any warning or error message in MIRO for "RG23A Part 2 not posted".
I alredy maintained the message 8I 478 as ERROR message in " Logistics - General - Tax on Goods Movements - India - Tools - Message Control ".
But still system doesn't issue error message in MIRO.

Hi,
The message 8I 478 will work only in condition the invoice had been captured and yet to be posted.
If you only upadte PART1 then it will not work, so better capture the PART-11 entries and try it.
For more details refer the below note it may help you.
Note 858772 - RG 23 Part II message not coming during MIRO.

Similar Messages

MIRO posting without status

Hello,
after the release upgrade from 4.6 C to ECC6.0 we get following error message:
"Error in the evaluation of expression '&BUS2081<???>.STATUS&' for item '8'"
The workflow is defined in a way that the user has the option to perform the posting via FB01, FB60 or MIRO. When the user press the MIRO button by error and goes out of the MIRO transaction without a posting after he realized the mistake, the status of BUS2081 is "undefined".
Until now we make only following check: &BUS2081.Status& <> 'D', but as the status is undefined, the workitem ends in error.
Does someone know, how we can avoid the undefined status, or how we should change the check?
Best regards
Sandra

Hi,
I seems that some patches or Notes (Related to MM & SD Module) to Apply. The same problem initial faced after upgrade.
Inform Basis Team and you can check the related notes in the website Service.sap.com
Regards,
Surjith

MIRO posted without NF Type - E1 Nota Fiscal Incoming

Hello
We have posted one MIRO document with assigning NF Type -E1 Nota Fiscal Incoming.
How we can change the MIRO document and assign the same.
Regards, Niti Narayan

Hi,
Please post in the following forum.
/community [original link is broken]
It is a specific forum for Brazilian Localization.
Cheers !

If GR based IV checked for items without excise duty, MIRO posting hanging.

Iam working in a client location, one of client business scenario is MIRO posting without excise (Only VAT or CST). for this case i have not maintained vendor excise details in J1ID.
When a MIRO with reference to PO for an item ticked for "GR based IV" is posted, the system is hanging or is not posting and not issuing any message. Specifically for an item to which exicse is not applicable.
please send your expert advice on this
Edited by: J Sridharan on Mar 30, 2009 3:55 PM

Thanks for your response
this issue is further briefed below
we are working for a indian client with CIN. most of the PO's which is created in SAP system with all Excise parameters and applicable taxes. further all PO's created with GR based IV check box enabled.
now the issue is, in some of the purchases vendor is not applicable for excise, so there is no excise parameters in the PO, only tax is applicable. for this case we have not maintained vendor excise details in J1ID. but we have maintained material chapter id and CENVAT determination in J1ID. but as i mentioed earlier these PO's also with GR based IV check box enabled.
If the PO is not excisable no Excise capturing and posting is required, for these types of PO's we are following the below steps
1. Creation of PO with GR based IV check box enabled
2. Goods Receipt without excise capturing
3. Invoice verification - MIRO ( here system is not able to post the docuement because of GR based IV tick mark)
i hope this will brief about my query.
waiting for your response.

During cancelation of MIRO document giving error message "RG23 Part II post

Dear guru's,
I am facing a tipical issue while i am going to reverse the MIRO document it is giving error "RG23 Part II posting not yet done" .
Senario is -- user has created MIGO with Myp103 and then 105, system promted excise tab and excise ref. and excise date is their .
But no Part1 generated.
So no part2 .
Now A/c has passed the bill and fi doc generated. Now we want revrse this bill (MIRO) and respectively MIGO (105/103 ) and again capture it with correct excise entry.
we want to understand, How this happned at 105 why part1 not generated and with out part2 how bill passed.
now waht can bo done to reverse this.
thanks in advance.
Ajeet

Hello,
Please check the status of excise invoices if they are "In process" stage. Unless the status is "Posted" you will not be allowed to do MIRO. Further, select only those line items which belong to excise invoice.
Another possibillity of the error could be that the user must have changed the excise invoice date after it was referred in MIGO.
If so, to avoid such issues and to stop the users from doing the above, please review the notes : 1285986, 1346926, 1406505.
I hope this helps.
Thanks and regards,
Suresh.

Error-RG23 Part-2 posting not yet done in MIRO

Hi Expert,
While doing MIRO, i am getting Error-RG23 Part 2 posting not yet done.
While analysis, i came to know that, user did 101 and then 102 and then J1IEX in 2014.
After that did new MIGO-101 in 2015 with same Excise Number-00917.
When i go to J1IEX and enter Vendor Excise Invoice-00917, it shows 2 Lines 2013-In Process and 2014-Posted.
So whether Error in MIRO is due to Excise Invoice for 2013
If yes what activity can be done for Excise Invoice for 2013

What ever the case, If the Material document is canceled through MIGO then Excise invoice has to be Posted and Canceled in J1IEX provided Part 1 and Part2 were captured earlier for the Excise invoice.
Now in your case, Could you tell us whether you had posted Part 1 and Part 2 for the 101 Material document posted earlier in year 2013.
If you had posted Part 1 and Part 2 then you have to Post the Excise invoice and Cancel the same in J1IEX. If not, the status would be In process always.If you do not want to cancel the Excise invoice, you only have the following options.
1) Configure the message as a Warning Message for Certain user and ask the user to Post MIRO.
2) change the status of the excise invoice in J_1IEXCHDR, J_1IEXCDTL, J_1IGRXREF.

Miro posting error : RG23 posting not yet done.

Dear Experts,
IN GR DOES NOT CAPTURE EXCISE INVOICE, that means part 1 not done & in po also does not apply excise duty BUT AT THE TIME OF MIRO POSTING ASKS PART II POSTING NOT YET DONE.
PLEASE HELP.
THANKS,
Sachin.
Edited by: sachin shelke on Dec 6, 2008 6:48 AM
Edited by: sachin shelke on Dec 6, 2008 6:52 AM

Hi,
Ask the concerned taxation team to do the part II entry through J1IEX and then do the MIRO.
Regards

Commitment item not picking while MIRO posting for Service entry sheet

Hi to all,
We have activated Fund Management in middle of the year where there were purchase order completed to till MIGO. When we do MIRO now system unable to pick commitment item from FMDERIVE.
We have created Commitment item as 50/3 combination ( No budget check ) and assigned to GR/IR clearing account.
We also activated trace in FMDERIVE and checked MIRO posting and found that derivation is working properly but while posting it is triggering error.
Some one advise me as it affected daily activities.
Thanks & Regards,
Y.Kiran Babu

Hi,
For the purchase order completed and the related MIGO created before FM was implemented, you need to run FMCN and FMCT.
I will explain to you in detail all the information related to the matter.
First of all, it seems to be in your PO that does not have FM account assignment (funds center and commitment item) in account assignment TAB. In addition, the error occurs usually also because in your SES the FM account assignment is missing.
For GR and IR documents FM always takes the major part of the FM account assignment from the PO.
You can fill these account assignments by using the programs RFFMCHAN/RFFMCHAT.
FMCN/FMCT must be run for the first document in the chain, which is the PO in case you don't have a PR assigned to this PO or an earmarked fund document. If you have PR's assigned to the PO's please run FMCN/FMCT for the PR first.
When executing the FMCT transaction, ALL documents selected in one group must be tested and processed successfully TOGETHER. If any one document fails, the ENTIRE group is shown as in error.
Therefore, first step is to ensure that the reference PO has a valid FM account assignment and is updated in FM. This should be done by FMCN/FMCT and subsequent posting with FMN4N (see reconstruction note 189761).
The SES itself might not be changed by FMCT. Therefore you should fulfill the FM account assignments in SES manually or with a custom program.
Please check also your table FM01X. As an alternative solution, you can enable one of these flags in table FM01X, depending on your business needs:
FLG_PO_PROTECT if you want to always inherit the fm account assignment from the reference PO and therefore skip FMDERIVE
FLG_FMDERIVE_FORCE if you always want to force a call to fmderive in all cases
FLG_SES_OVERWRITE in services, if you wish to overwrite the account assignment from the SES with the derived values from FMDERIVE.
You can find more information about it in text part of notes 1146677 and 923672.
FMDERIVE is skipped for GR/IR lines and the Commitment item is inherited from the PO regardless of whether or not the GR/IR line is FM relevant. This is SAP standard behavior.
If you want to force the Commitment item to be derived from the GL account for the GR/IR line, you can use the FLG_FMDERIVE_FORCE flag as described in note 923672. This will allow FMDERIVE to be called for these lines. Please be sure to fully test this to ensure that FM account assignments that you do not want to be overwritten are not incorrectly derived.
Bear in mind that for PO´s that does not have account assignment you should run FMCN/FMCT + FMN4N. For this you would need to check the flags and which one is more related to your needs. With the appropriate flag marked in FM01X (active with X) you should be able to run the transactions without any issue.
Based on note 189761, after doing all the previous suggestions and the issue does not appear anymore, I suggest you to run the following programs:
1) FMN0 for this PO/GR to see if the actual values are correct in FM table FMIFIIT (FM actual line items).
2) Run report RFFMRC04 (transaction FMAF). The reconstruction programs always update the totals records in Funds Management. Therefore, you do not normally need to reconstruct the totals records. However, if you suspect there are data inconsistencies in the totals records, you can analyze and correct these using the report RFFMRC04 (transaction FMAF).
If you correct the totals records, you must do this before you reconstruct the assigned values (see below).
3) Run reconstruction for AVC
You can also reconstruct the assigned values using the following tools:
    o Report BPINDX03 (transaction FMBV) for former budgeting
    o Report RFFMAVC_REINIT (transaction FMAVCREINIT) for the Budget
       Control System (BCS)
Make sure that no other system activities (postings, budgeting) are carried out during a reconstruction (commitment/actual or assigned values).
I believe that this resolve your inquiry.
Best Regards,
Vanessa.

MIRO post - Invoice Reduction Scenario - Duplicate SPLIT_KEY in RBWS

Hi Experts,
I came across a challenging issue... seeking help from you...
MIRO posting Vendor is Subjected to withholding tax & INVOICE REDUCTION scenario..... As per SAP Invoice Reduction scenarion, MIRO creates Invoice and subsequent debit memo for reduction amount.
When User try to post the LIV document, transaction returns the " Express Termination error " due to Duplicate entries are accumulated for Table RBWS with same SPLIT_KEY (Grouping key for Splitting Vendor line item ) for 2 sets of withholding Tax entries. ST22 system dump happens in FM- MRM_WITHHOLDING_TAXES_SAVE. Couldn't able to find the reason for Duplicate SPLIT_KEY
I Would like to understand significance of SPLIT_KEY in RBWS ? and
Under what circumstance MIRO posting will have different SPLIT_KEY
in RBWS for same MM document ??
Any insight would be great help.
Regards,
Sri

I agree, you can use the Credit Memo functionality in SAP, but I don't think you can print out a form once the credit memo form to send to the Vendor that states you are taking the debit. It would also be useful if this process was automated. The invoice is blocked, you determine that the Vendor is at fault, the Credit Memo is automatically posted and a Debit Memo is printed out. Anyone aware of any bolt on software that might help?

MIRO Posti - Invoice Reduction Scenario - Duplicate SPLIT_KEY in Table RBWS

Hi Experts,
I came across a challenging issue... seeking help from you...
MIRO posting Vendor is Subjected to withholding tax & INVOICE REDUCTION scenario..... As per SAP Invoice Reduction scenarion, MIRO creates Invoice and subsequent debit memo for reduction amount.
When User try to post the LIV document, transaction returns the " Express Termination error " due to Duplicate entries are accumulated for Table RBWS with same SPLIT_KEY (Grouping key for Splitting Vendor line item ) for 2 sets of withholding Tax entries. system dump happens in FM- MRM_WITHHOLDING_TAXES_SAVE. Couldn't able to find the reason for Duplicate SPLIT_KEY
I Would like to understand significance of SPLIT_KEY in RBWS ? and
Under what circumstance MIRO posting will have different SPLIT_KEY
in RBWS for same MM document ??
Any insight would be great help.
Regards,
Sri

Hi,
1.- read this OSS Note:
https://service.sap.com/sap/support/notes/1156325
here it says:
An active implementation of this BAdI excludes the manual entry of the withholding tax base and amount.
You define the settings for the calculation in Financial Accounting Customizing under the following activity:
Define Withholding Tax Type for Invoice Posting
Have you done that?
2.- read this OSS Note too:
https://service.sap.com/sap/support/notes/1286713
according to this note:
When you create an implementation for the BAdI MRM_WT_SPLIT_UPDATE,
fill the internal tables TE_RBVS[] and TE_RBWS[] as follows:
TE_RBVS[] = I_RBKPV-H_RBVS[].
TE_RBWS[] = I_RBKPV-H_RBWS[].
it seems you should do the same.
e.g.
TE_RBWS[] = LT_RBWS[].
3.- you´re filling internal table lt_lfbw but you´re not doing anything with it, why?
Best regards.
Edited by: Pablo Casamayor on Jan 9, 2010 12:53 PM

Posting date ealier to sevrive entry

hi every one
can any one suggest for the user exit for the MIRO about posting dates
actually problem is we do MIRO for service entry sheet. so we would like the posting date of the MIRO should be greater then the posting date of the service entry release date.
so could any one suggest me which user exit will perfectly set for this requirement.
regards,
Manu

no answers from forum

Facing problem in MIRO posting

Dear Experts:
We are facing problem in MIRO posting for March 2014 entries. When we submit post for a Particular MIRO by giving back date 30.03.2014 then system generating MIRO number but that MIRO number not showing in vendor line item display or document flow. If we go back then system giving below message.
For your kind information I'm also attaching our number range screen shot.
For current period we are not facing any issue. Would you please suggest us what should we do to post MIRO by giving date of March 2014.
Thanks in advance and your kind suggestion is highly appreciated.
Best Regards.
Ripon Kumar Paul

It would be better if you analysis you update termination error in TCode ST22.
Refer following discussion, where I have explained how to analysis this in ST22.
- http://scn.sap.com/message/13915998
Thanks, JP

Parking MIRO Document Without Vendor Information

Hi,
I am trying to park a miro document without the vendor information and only with the header information like date, posting and amount, however the system is not allowing me to do so. Its showing an error message M8696 - Enter invoicing party. I tried to change this error message from E to W in OMRM t.code but it looks like this message has been hard coded to an error message in the MIRO program so changing it from E to W in OMRM does not help here.
How can i park this document in this case without vendor information?

Hi,
I want to park with the following details only :-
Invoice date
Posting date
Amount
Tax amount
This is the requirement from the user. Technically speaking since this is just a parking why can't the system allow parking?

Miro posting - BSX transaction key take place

Dear Consultants,
While posting MIRO document, the BSX transaction key is taking place & posting key is 89 apart from WRX transaction key, the figure of (MIRO )WRX transaction key ie the automatic G/L a/c assign in OBYC is matching with WRX transaction key in MIGO.
pls note that BSX transaction key i.e automatic G/L posting is taking effect in MIGO.( 120000Rs)
My question is why BSX transaction key ( hardly 200 Rs ) is taking place in MIRO posting, wht was the reason & further there is no invoice condition difference from PO & MIRO.
Anticipating your advices.
Edited by: vivek tripathi on Sep 26, 2008 6:55 AM

Hi
There must be some difference in the PO Value and the Actual invoice received from the Vendor. This difference can be due to various reasons, e.g. difference in Basic Value, or difference in Sales Tax, or even difference in amount of excise duty as that as per the PO condition and as captured in J1IEX
regards
Parag Bhargava

CIN: How to check the material document posted without excise invoice

Hi Guru,
Please advise how to check the material document posted without excise invoice.
I have tried tcode J1I7 but it seems start to collect the excise invoice first and then material document.
But my case is to find the material document WITHOUT excise invoice for internal tracking purpose.
At the moment we start from tcode MB51 to get the list of material document and check in J_1IEXCHDR / J_1IEXCDTL
Best regards,
Pakorn

Hi,
Try creating a Query in Tcode SQVI by combining tables MKPF and J_1IEXCHDR/J_1IEXCDTL for your requirement.
Check these threads how to create Query.
http://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/scn/go/portal/prtroot/docs/library/uuid/6018c1ae-8c44-2d10-6ea9-c3fad2c82880?QuickLink=index&…
http://ptgmedia.pearsoncmg.com/images/9780672329029/samplechapter/0672329026_CH03.pdf
Regards
Binoy

MIRO posted without capturing RG23 PART 2 entry

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for