Subsequent debit tax calculating wrong
dear guru
while doing subsequent debit for the vendor the Excise duty is calculating wrong
my issue is like this
i have purchase 100 quty with value 10/kg total amount is 1000 for that
ED is calculated 140
Ecess calculated 3
S&H calculated 1
i have done goods receipt and posted invoice also
now i that part of the quantit i have returne
lets 50 kg i have retune for that MIRO,MIGO,JIS,J1iV i have done
next vendor will send the suplimentry invocie because the rate is increase for that 50 quantiy, for that i will do J1IH for the additional excise and i will do MIRO subsequent debit for the rate increse in miro the tax amount is calculating wrong, ie
lets for 50 quantity total amoun increased 100
ed should calculate 14 but it is calculating 28
for that i have to apply any note
pl tell me urgent
thanks
regards
jrp
My understanding about the Input Tax and Output Tax was wrong. In the issue reported
Input Tax Calculation should be:
Vendor A/C.............. Cr 30000-
Expense A/C............ Dr 29100
Input Tax A/C............ Dr 900 (@3% on 30000)---my understanding was wrong.
Input Tax 3% should be charged on Expense amount, in this case Rs 30000. But because in the editing option calculate tax on net amount option was not selected, hence SAP was giving the below entry, which is correct as well.
Vendor A/C.............. Cr 30000-
Expense A/C............ Dr 29126.21
Input Tax A/C............ Dr 873.79 (@3% on 29126.21) which is correct.
Hence, the Vendor amount should be Expense + Input Tax= 30000 * 3%=900 + 30000 (expense) = 30900.
Correct Entry should be:
Vendor A/C...............Cr 30900
Expense A/C............Dr 30000
Input Tax A/C............Dr 900
Resolved. Pankaj has given the correct answer.
Similar Messages
-
Import PO subsequent Debit: Taxes not calculated as per tax Code in MIRO
Dear All,
I am facing the problem while taking Subsequent debit (MIRO) of Import PO. I am using service Tax code 10.30 % .
When I entered the amount 4000 INR. It calculated the taxes 348.18 which is not correct.
I also check condition in FV13 its properly maintained.
Thanks in Advance
Regards
Pawan SardaHello
Thanks for ur Reply.
MIRO -- Subsequent Debit -
>Tax code - S3 ( 10.30 % Services Tax) -
>PO NO. -
> change Vendor ( Import Vendor to Domestic Vendor) -
> Amount 4000 INR -
> also change Tax Code of Line Item -
>Simulate
Vendor A\c -
> 4,348.18 INR Cr
Stock A\c -
> 4,000.00 INR Dr
Service Tax -
> 338.04 INR Dr
ECS -
> 6.76 INR Dr
HECS -
> 3.38 INR Dr
Above process I m doing against Import PO but I m not identify why its calculated Wrong Service Tax or calculating on which base amount ?
Actual Entry
Vendor A\c -
> 4,412.00 INR Cr
Stock A\c -
> 4,000.00 INR Dr
Service Tax -
> 400.00 INR Dr
ECS -
> 8.00 INR Dr
HECS -
> 4.00 INR Dr
Edited by: pawansarda on Jan 21, 2012 11:41 AM -
Input Tax and Output Tax calculating wrong figures
Hi,
I have created Input Tax and Output Tax codes in SAP.
Input Tax- 3%
Output Tax- 4%
All the configuration is done as required. But when I am posting the Purchase and Sales Invoice, the tax amount is not calculating correctly.
For example:
Input Tax Calculation should be:
Vendor A/C.............. Cr 30000-
Expense A/C............ Dr 29100
Input Tax A/C............ Dr 900 (@3% on 30000)
Input Tax Calculation in SAP:
Vendor A/C.............. Cr 30000-
Expense A/C............ Dr 29126.21
Input Tax A/C............ Dr 873.79 (@3% on 30000)
The same is happening to Output Tax transactions.
Please advice.My understanding about the Input Tax and Output Tax was wrong. In the issue reported
Input Tax Calculation should be:
Vendor A/C.............. Cr 30000-
Expense A/C............ Dr 29100
Input Tax A/C............ Dr 900 (@3% on 30000)---my understanding was wrong.
Input Tax 3% should be charged on Expense amount, in this case Rs 30000. But because in the editing option calculate tax on net amount option was not selected, hence SAP was giving the below entry, which is correct as well.
Vendor A/C.............. Cr 30000-
Expense A/C............ Dr 29126.21
Input Tax A/C............ Dr 873.79 (@3% on 29126.21) which is correct.
Hence, the Vendor amount should be Expense + Input Tax= 30000 * 3%=900 + 30000 (expense) = 30900.
Correct Entry should be:
Vendor A/C...............Cr 30900
Expense A/C............Dr 30000
Input Tax A/C............Dr 900
Resolved. Pankaj has given the correct answer. -
Oracle AP: With Holding Tax Calculated wrongly
Dear Pros...
Pls help with regards to the following...
We want Oracle to APPLY Witholding tax at Payment time and create withholding invoice at payment time
Following is our setup:
In Payable Options window: Witholding Tax Tab
Use Witholding Tax = Check
Allow Manual Witholding = Check
Witholding amount basis:
Include Tax amount = Check
Apply Witholding Tax:
At Payment Time = Check
Create Witholding Invoice :
At Payment Time = Check
Total Invoice Amount to be processed = 100
Our desired result should be the following double entry
@ Invoice entry time
DR Expense 100
Cr Liability 100
@ payment time…..we want system to do the following entry
DR Liability 100
CR CASH 95
CR WITHOLDING TAX 5
BUT
INSTEAD OF DOING ABOVE DOUBL ENTRY…….
ORACLE IS DOING FOLLOWING DOUBLE ENTRY
@ Invoice entry level (same as desired)
DR Expense 100
Cr Liability 100
@ Invoice Payment level (Oracle is deducting extra tax and debiting liability with 105) which we don’t want
Dr Liability 105
CR Cash 100
CR Witholding Tax 5
PLS Help....!Hi,
In your initial post you mention this option in Payables Options:
Total Invoice Amount to be processed = 100
Where do you find this option?
Octavio -
Hi,
I see a scenario where a blanket purchase order is created , but without the item category 'B'. The value is limited by the quantity entered in the PO and by releasing it. The invoices are posted against the PO, with the amounts in the invoices from the vendor. And Goods Receipt also posted for that amount.
Once a subsequent debit is posted for the credit note received. Is there a necessity to post a GR in this case(possible with a negative value?). And if so, what could be the movement type.
Thanks
AparnaHello
Thanks for ur Reply.
MIRO -- Subsequent Debit -
>Tax code - S3 ( 10.30 % Services Tax) -
>PO NO. -
> change Vendor ( Import Vendor to Domestic Vendor) -
> Amount 4000 INR -
> also change Tax Code of Line Item -
>Simulate
Vendor A\c -
> 4,348.18 INR Cr
Stock A\c -
> 4,000.00 INR Dr
Service Tax -
> 338.04 INR Dr
ECS -
> 6.76 INR Dr
HECS -
> 3.38 INR Dr
Above process I m doing against Import PO but I m not identify why its calculated Wrong Service Tax or calculating on which base amount ?
Actual Entry
Vendor A\c -
> 4,412.00 INR Cr
Stock A\c -
> 4,000.00 INR Dr
Service Tax -
> 400.00 INR Dr
ECS -
> 8.00 INR Dr
HECS -
> 4.00 INR Dr
Edited by: pawansarda on Jan 21, 2012 11:41 AM -
Dear Experts,
I am using tax code (ZS) with 10%, 2% and 1%.
when i am posting FB60 by using this tax code its calculating tax amounts wrongly.
For example i am posting Rs.20000/-
when system has to calculate..
Vendor Cr 20,000/-
Expense Dr 17,940/-
Sevice tax On OH Dr 2,000/-
ECS on OH Dr 40/-
SEC on OH Dr 20/-
But Systm Calculating like below..
Vendor Cr 20,000.00
Expense Dr 18,132.37
Sevice tax On OH 1,813.24
ECS on OH 36.26
SEC on OH 18.13
Plese help on this issue...Dear Anil
Kindly note that Tax will always be created on Amount Exclusive of Tax. Let me explain with an example.
The form of invoice would be in the following form :
Expense of Service Recd 20000 (Excl of Tax)
Add : Serv Tax @10% 2000
Add : Ecess & SHCess 60
Total Invoice Amt. 22060 (Incl of Tax)
Thus if you enter Against Expense 20000 as net invoice amount in FB60
then following entry will be generated :
Exp ..... Dr. 20000
Serv Tax Dr. 2000
Ecess & SHcess Dr. 60
To Vendor 22060
But if you choose Expense 20000 as gross amount invoice in FB60
Exp ..... Dr. 18,132.37
Serv Tax Dr. 1,813.24
Ecess & SHcess Dr. 54.39
To Vendor 20,000.00
Hope it provide you better picture about Tax Calculation -
Dear all
1.what is the difference between debit note and subsequent debit
2.credit note and subsequent credit
3.credit memo
Please guide me with a simple exampleHi,
1. A transaction that reduces Amounts Receivable from a customer is a credit memo. For eg. The customer could return damaged goods. A debit memo is a transaction that reduces Amounts Payable to a vendor because, you send damaged goods back to your vendor.
2. Credit memo request is a sales document used in complaints processing to request a credit memo for a customer. If the price calculated for the customer is too high, for example, because the wrong scale prices were used or a discount was forgotten, you can create a credit memo request. The credit memo request is blocked for further processing so that it can be checked. If the request is approved, you can remove the block. The system uses the credit memo request to create a credit memo.
You can use credit memos in Sales and Distribution (SD) for assigning credit memo requests to the open invoices and in Financial Accounting (FI) for assigning credit memos and payments to the open invoices and carry out clearing with them. If you use both Financial Accounting (FI) and Sales and Distribution (SD), there is a 1:1 relationship between the credit memo request and the credit memo item posted in Financial Accounting (FI). As soon as you bill the credit memo request together with other sales orders, or distribute the items of one credit memo request to several billing documents, the assignment is no longer valid and the system will not process it.
For credit memos, credit memo requests, and payments, you have the following assignment options:
- Assignment to a single invoice
- Assignment of a partial amount to an invoice
- Assignment to several invoices
When you post credit memos, the payment programme processes them automatically. If the credit memo is specifically related to a particular open invoice item, the payment program automatically attempts to offset the credit memo against the open item. If it is not possible to completely offset the credit memo against an invoice, you can post a debit memo to the vendor, who is to reimburse the amount. Then you can apply a multilevel dunning program.
3. Debit memo request is a sales document used in complaints processing to request a debit memo for a customer. If the prices calculated for the customer were too low, for example, calculated with the wrong scaled prices, you can create a debit memo request. The debit memo request can be blocked so that it can be checked. When it has been approved, you can remove the block. It is like a standard order. The system uses the debit memo request to create a debit memo
Regards,
Deepak. -
Dear All,
Presently In payroll system income tax calculation is based on allowance paid basis. but our client is required that is projected bais. for example
presently if am paying bonus through info type 15 rs 100,000 then system is deducting tax from remaining month in equal installment but client is required that it has to be deducted one time at this month.
please help me
BMSDear All,
I read the attached document in sap note i.e.1024284 in this sap note attached document is Guideline.pdf in this document they have clearly mention that ....
Introduction
There may be a need to apply flat tax rate on irregular payments for a particular month. If
they are required to be taxed separately it is not possible to do in the regular payroll run
in the system currently. Currently the system supports TDS at different rate on these
payments through offcycle payroll run. This document explains how this can be achieved
during regular run.
It means if we applied this note then system will deduct flat % on bonus amount if i am wrong please tell me the fact
BMS -
Subsequent debit - different behaviour for PO based IR and GR based IR
Hy Guys,
i am facing currently a problem with my understanding of system behaviour for GR Based Invoice Verification in combination with Subsequent Debit Postings...
Example 1 - System Behaviour in case of PO based Invoice Verification:
PO with 3000 PC Material XYZ / Price 10 EUR
Goods Receipt for all 3000 Pieces
Goods Issue for 2000 Pieces
Situation is now:
Valuated Material XYZ with Stock Quantity 1000 PC / MAP 10 / Stock Value = 10.000 EUR
Subsequent Debit Posting for 300 EUR / 3000 PC
Result is that Stock Account is debited with 100 EUR / Price Difference with 200 EUR
New Situation is:
Valuated Material XYZ with Stock Quantity 1000 PC / MAP 10,1 / Stock Value = 10.100 EUR
This makes sense to me!!!
Example 2 - System Behaviour in case of GR based Invoice Verification:
PO with 3000 PC Material XYZ / Price 10 EUR
Seperate Goods Receipt for 1000 PC - three times
Goods Issue for 2000 Pieces
Situation is now:
Valuated Material XYZ with Stock Quantity 1000 PC / MAP 10 / Stock Value = 10.000 EUR
Subsequent Debit Posting for 300 EUR / 3000 PC
Result is that Stock Account is debited with 300 EUR (But there are only 1000 PC currently on stock!!!!! - System thinks there are 3000 on stock....)
New Situation is:
Valuated Material XYZ with Stock Quantity 1000 PC / MAP 10,3 / Stock Value = 10.300 EUR
In that case i think system behaviour is wrong, because MAP increased to much.
Any comments? Is this customizable?
Thanks!
BR;
GregorHi Gregor,
Wellcome to SCN. Please, see SAP Note 308008 - FAQ: Posting logic: GR/IR clearing account, and related notes.
Regards
Eduardo -
Excise not captured in the MIGO & Tax calculation is not correct in the PO.
Excise Settings completed. 02.11.2007
a) Configuration done as per J05 Building block.( Tax Procedure TAXINN)
b) Maintained J1ID, all steps.
c) Maintained tax code in FTXP.
d) FV11  Maintained for Material, vendor, Plant in combination with Tax code input tax maintained in FTXP.
e) Checked CIN Health, all tick are green.
f) Given all G/L accounts for Excise Transaction Type (ETT)
g) Maintained all number Ranges.
Issue  1)
Tax calculation is not correct in the PO, tax tab
a) JMIP is appearing 12% in condition amount, (as per condition record) but condition value is Zero, (Not calculated by the FI Pricing procedure). Screen shot for Pricing procedure, PO taxes and condition record given below.
b) JIPC Sales tax 4% in condition amount (as per condition record) , calculated by the FI Pricing procedure is 8%, condition value is Rs 8 instead of Rs 4
Fi pricing procedure.
PO Taxes  wrong Tax calculated
FV11 Condition record
Issue  2)
While creating Goods receipt aginst PO (Tax code V2 in PO). Movement type 101, Excise tab appears at Header and Item level and we need to put the Vendors Excise Invoice and date, nothing is copied from the PO for Excise duty & sales tax.
Now we put the values for ED and Sales tax manually in the MIGO and saved the document. While display material document, excise tab is not there i.e. no excise related activiy is captured here in goods receipt.
If you need more detail, please revert on cell 093295 53235.
Please suggest.
Manish Gupta
93295 53235
[email protected]Hai,
1.Check the condition types JMIP & JMIC in IMG - Financial accting New - FI AC Global settings - Taxes on sales and purchases - Check calculation procedure - Define condition type.
2.The condition types you have used are defined for non deductible taxes i.e., it gets inventorised, added to the material account.And also the accural key assigned to this condition types are NVV - defined for non ded input taxes.
3.Instead the condition types defined by SAP Standard system for BED & ST are JMOP & JIPS and the accurals assigned to this are VS1 & VS5.
If you want clear details mail the screen shots to my id [email protected] -
Error In Posting to accounts - PF calculated wrong
Hi,
I am getting error in Posting to accounts- error - Posting balance is not cleared (Period -
Following Wage types are calculated wrong -
Expense
MF90 PF adm chrgs * 1,00,000 = 715,000.000
MF70 EDLI contri * 1,00,000 =6,500.000
Balance sheet
MF90 PF adm chrgs * 1,00,000 = 715,000.000-
MF70 EDLI contri * 1,00,000 = 325,000.000-
MF80 EDLI adm chrgs * 1,00,000 =6,500.000-
/3P2 Professional Tax Basis = 8,387.096-
Symbolic accounts assigned are as standard - no changes made
Please help me solve this.
Thanks in advance.
MonicaHi Monica,
We have solved this issue in our company.
For this you have to create another wage types & make a "PCR" as it divide the 100000 amount from the technical wage types, & then instead of posting the technical wage types post the new wage types u have created.
Don't worry about statutory reports as in there SAP is using some factor which will give the correct value.
Regards,
Gaurav -
Subsequent delivery and subsequent debit
Dear All,
material type: NLAG
account assignemnt (PO): cost center, non valuated GR
Scenario:
1. GR (MIGO) - material_document1, qty 100
2. IR (MIRO) - invoice1 for material_document1, qty 100
> vendor makes correction because qty is more or less than the original
3. GR (MIGO) - material document2 - qty 20 (sum qty for PO item is 120)
4. IR (MIRO) - subsequent_debit1 for 20 pcs
These connections / links should exist:
Material_document1 - invoice1
Material_docuemt2 - subsequent_debit1
My question
How can I solve this? Is it posible to book the subsequent debit with reference to material_docuement2?
If I create the subsequent invoice it is valid only for material_document1 EVEN IF I do material_document2 as SUBSEQUENT DELIVERY in MIGO (in this case the two material documents are connected). SAP expects an additional invoice for material_document2 (but it is linked to material_docuement1!).
In my opinion it cannot be solved since the debit/credit memo refers to the "original" material document (1) and invoice (1).
Thanks,
Csaba
My question was a little bit incoherent...
I wanted SAP to suggest the to-be-credited qty&value automatically in case of returns to vendor - but it's not possible in standard system as per my best knowledge .
Edited by: Csaba Szommer on Mar 4, 2009 9:18 PM
Edited by: Csaba Szommer on Mar 4, 2009 9:22 PMHi Bala krishnan,
when there is a price difference this entry would takes place. while reversing the same should be reversed, in your case the system is posting to another account.
please check the account key against the wrong line item ( this you can see with the help of changing layout), then goto OBYC and check the gl accounts assigned against that. To check either it is right or wrong compare with the standard/default company codes settings i.e 0001 co.cd.
Thanks & Regards,
Shashi Kanth. -
Tax calculation on sales order and invoice is different
2007A, SP0, PL49
The tax on a sales order does not match the tax on the linked delivery and invoice by 1 cent. We take payment based on the sales order amount as the delivery and invoice are done after the fact. Why is the tax calculated differently on the delivery/invoice? We would want it to always match.
Item price = $111.04. Taxcode rate 13% has combination of 5% GST + 8% ONTAX.
On Sales Order, ONTAX = $8.88
On Delivery/Invoice, ONTAX = $8.89
Can someone please explain the difference? Is rounding/tax calcualtion controlled by system settings per document?Something must be wrong with your Sales Order tax. The actual tax would be 8.8832. Round up to 8.89 is correct. Do you have any SP, FMS or add-on been used?
Thanks,
Gordon -
Tax calculation in SRM from ECC
Hello All
Our requirement is to validate the ship to address entered by an user in SRM shopping cart.
We thought about activating tax calculation in SRM ( by making a call to ECC) , so that the address will be automatically checked & return an error if Tax jurisdiction is not found.
However it turns out that in ECC , the tax jurisdiction is not unique for a given address.
For each address ECC returns two Tax jurisdictions ( One for Out of City & One for in City).
Is there a way to influence ECC and make it always select one of the found Tax jurisdictions.
Is there any other means of checking that the SHip to address is correct ??
Thanks
KedarThanks Ramki !
Our Users should enter the correct combination of City , Zip code, Region and Country when entering
their own ad-hoc addresses in shopping carts.
If Tax calculation is enabled then this is taken care of ,as any wrong combination returns the error " Tax Jurisdiction not found".
However as I mentioned earlier our FICO is set up peculiarly in ECC.
For most Zip code, city and county combinations , there are two tax jurisdictions ( one for in city and one for out of city).
So when SRM calls , ECC can't decide which Tax Jurisdiction to return and hence always returns the error.
I researched on this and no SRM BADI seems relevant. Is there any ECC user exit or any other way??
Thanks
Kedar -
MIRO/ Subsequent Debit problem
I have the following scenario.
A purchase is made for a material for which the taxes include Excise Duties , VAT/CST. Now when we return this item physically , we reverse all taxes , n this is done via sales.
But when we make a subsequent credit , that is debit to vendor , due to quality reasons ( not involving any physical returns) , we reverse the VAT/CST , but NOT Excise.
In MIRO, when i make a subsequent debit to ve ndor ,how can i make a provision such that only VAT?CST is reversed n not Excise ?
Thanks in advance ,
Regards
AnisPls extend Help
Maybe you are looking for
-
[b]EJB Hotel RA Client Error - HELP[/b]
1. Travel schema installed fine 2. Web Client can successfully be run and all the buttons work fine 3. The only file I modified was in config properties. Provider_Url = ormi://localhost:8888/OneEJBHotel 4. in oc4j directory: principals file: user id
-
Data Source Disappearing randomly
Hi, I am having a peculiar problem with Creator. Please go through steps Step 1: Created a datasource with following attributes <dataSources majVer="1" minVer="0"> <dataSource name="sardb" driverClassName="com.sun.sql.jdbc.oracle.OracleDriver" url="j
-
Partition Error - target disk too small
On my 3.1Ghz iMac running OSX 10.8.5 I'm trying to Partition my Hard drive so I can setup a second boot. Currently my Macintosh HD has 404.07GB USED and 707.75 AVAILABLE. I'm trying to add a partition that is about 350GB. But when I do so, it gives
-
My external drive looks like i still have all the info(taking up a large ammount of data on drive) but i cannot see it.
-
OVD - Suppress OU's in Adapter
Hello, I have a requirement to suppress a series of OU's in an LDAP Adapter. I am federating two separate Active Directories in which one is a subset of the other. I want my final federated OVD LDAP to look like this: dc=federated,dc=com + Root + + O