on 05-09-2012 7:55 PM
Hi SAP Experts,
I have a requirement where Billing documents should not be split on basis of Unloading points.
I have 2 deliveries which have different unloading points. If I create combined invoice through VF04 it splits the documents as Unloading points are different.
I checked in copy control routine. VBRK-ZUKRI has the same value for both the documents.
How can i avoid this split?
Thanks,
Can you check again, you may have different split logic. Do a check by creating 2 delivery with different unloading points, other data should be the same. In Vf01, enter 2 deliveries, hit enter key, click on a execute icon on top right. Select 2 documents and click on split analysis. Check what is the split criteria log.
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
I have checked at both the Tcodes VF01 and VF04. The split analysis log displays different Unloading points as splitting reason.
We use a custom requirement 900 which has logic as
gs_zuk-spart = vbak-spart.
gs_zuk-vtweg = vbak-vtweg.
gs_zuk-abtnr = lips-abtnr.
gs_zuk-empst = lips-empst.
vbrk-zukri = gs_zuk.
If I have 2 split invoices the value for vbrk-zukri is similar for both.
The splitting logic is in FM SD_PARTNER_READ/FORM XVBPA_AUFBAUEN .
If table VBPA has entries for 2 unloading points the invoice splits.
Can you suggest a way to avoid this?
Thanks
Can I check if you have unloading point in your partners?
VBPA is partner table. If you have 2 unloading points in your SO header partner, when copy to invoice, it will always auto split due to partner differences.
To resolve this, you will need to remove unloading point in your Invoice Header Partner determination procedure. Leave it at Invoice item level will do.
Alan,
2 Unloading points are defined in my customer master.
When a sales order is created different unloading are maintained in line items.
However my client has a requirement that even if the delivery is split due to different unloading points, the Billing document should be single one.
You mentioned "To resolve this, you will need to remove unloading point in your Invoice Header Partner determination procedure. Leave it at Invoice item level will do"
Could you pls explain more in detail about that?
Thanks,
Unloading point is attached to Ship-To Party in VBPA-ABLAD table. You have different unloading point but ship-to code is the same. If you can take a look at VBPA table to confirm this.
If this is so, it means you need to remove shipto party in invoice header partners determination procedures.
If I remove ship to party in invoice header partners determination procedures during invoice creation it errors out as:
Delivery1 Line no The ship-to party could not be determined
Delivery2 Line no The ship-to party could not be determined
Clearing fields likp-ablad,vbpa-ablad in routine did not work out either.
Check if the partner procedure that is assigned to the billing item category has partner function SH.
In order to not get that error message, please include partner function SH in partner procedure assigned to the billing item category. And then test by creating 2 deliveries with different Unloading points and then create an invoice. It might work out (i.e. splitting because of Unloading point might not happen)
I donot think there would be any problem.
In my experience in Billing,
- the partner procedure assigned to the billing header contains partner functions PY, SP and BP.
- the partner procedure assigned to the billing item contains partner function SH and others.
In assigning header partner functions, please ask what is the driving partner in that particular "stage of process" / document -
E.g.
- is sales (i.e. sales order creation) it is the partner that places the order (SP)
- in delivery it is the partner that shall receive the goods (SH)
- in billing it is the partner that shall pay for the goods (PY)
In SAP standard configuration, please see partner procedures FK and FP for more insight.
Important to note is in partner procedure FP, the partner function SH is mandatory.
Ofcourse understanding the business processes and the mapping of partner determination is important.
Shruti,
Probably my solution of writing a line of code in the routine might have worked for a field like plant (i.e. CLEAR lips-werks) or for field like Shipping conditions (i.e. CLEAR likp-vsbed) BUT Unloading point is "part" of the address of SH To party and not same as the field mentioned above.
I hope the difference between both (field and "part of....") is clear to you (in other words clearly explained by me)
Just to alert you to the following for this design.
If you have BI or BW reports, take care of how it pull invoice ship-to party.
Doing this design, it allows users to combine different ship-to code deliveries into 1 invoice. Not just unloading point.
If you have SD reports, customized or standard, take care of how it pulled invoice ship-to party.
You may risk user combining different ship-to country in 1 invoice and result in tax reporting wrong which may depend on country code. You may further consider to check that in copy requirements that all ship-to country in delivery partner is the same.
Hope the above is very useful.
Hello all.
I had the same problem and I got it through user exit RV60AFZD (FORM USEREXIT_NEWROLE_XVBPAP_AVBPAK)
Try to insert these lines:
data: ablad TYPE ablad.
LOOP AT XVBPAK .
clear XVBPAK-ABLAD.
MODIFY XVBPAK INDEX sy-tabix.
ENDLOOP.
I hope it helps.
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
Hi,
First try to analyse the values beacuse of which the system is splitting the billing document.
As you said the Un-loading point are different.
Here is a suggestion as , this split is happing because of the Header data / or Item data.
Most probably this will be header data.
Now go the copy control, ask your ABAPer to copy the Routine there and the create a New Routine same like the the one before and In the New routine , tell him to comment the Un-loading field entry.
and then put this new routine in place for use.
Hopefully this will resolve your Issue.
Thanks
RB
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
which copy requirement are you using?
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
User | Count |
---|---|
87 | |
7 | |
6 | |
4 | |
3 | |
3 | |
3 | |
3 | |
3 | |
3 |
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.