non-deductible tax jec3 coming zero in po

[Former Member]

Dear MM Gurus

We have recently updated the patches for SAP. After updation , we have following problem

1. The non-deductible taxes like  JEC3, JSEI, JMX1, JEC@ and JHX1 is coming zero in the PO Taxes.

2. Also during MIRO , the Excisable taxes are not picked up .

Kindly advice

[Prasoon · Accepted solution]

Hi,

  Please check in FV11 whether the condition records are maintained for these condition types. For JMX1, JHX1 etc, the condition records to be maintained as 100% in FV11.

  If its already maintained check its active and the validity period.

  Also, check whether the excise defaults are maintained correctly and the tax code is assigned to the company code.

  Check it and give us the feed back.

Regards,

AKPT

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Dear AKPT

FV11 is also maintained

JMX1, JEC2 AND JHX1 is maintained as 100%

They are active i,e validity perid is upto 31.12.9999

Excise defaults are also maintained. 

It was working perfectly fine, till we have updated the application to SAP _APPL_KH60022 LEVEL.

[brinda_r · Accepted solution]

Hi,

What you mean when you say non deductible tax?

Is it inventory condition?

If yes then classify JEC3 as ECSINVENTP and JEX2 as ECSINVENTT in J_1IEXCDEFN table.

Maintain 100% for JEX2 condition via FV11 and then create a new PO and check..

Brinda

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Brinda.

True, Brinda, shouldn't be non-deductible , can be phrased as inventorised / non-refundable.

I have checked in Excise Defaults for jec3 and jex2 , they are properly define as ECSinventp and ECSinventt. refer excise doc attached pl.

Even the conditions are maintained properly with validity and percentage . refer valid*.doc attached.

We have updated the patches after a very long period , till that the system was working perfectly ok, so the basic customisation is in place .

Regards

[brinda_r · Accepted solution]

Anjali,

Where is JEX2 condition in the above screenshot?

Attach full table data of J_1IEXCDEFN table and also PO > Taxes.

Regards,

Brinda

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

hi Brinda

Attached herewith excise default maintained for jmx1,jec2, jhx1

[former_member192897 · Accepted solution]

If you are using Non Deductible taxes then ensure they are properly classified in J_1IEXCDEFN table and maintained the condition records properly.

JEX2 ECSINVENTT

JHX2 AT1INVENTT

JMX2 BEDINVENTT

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Dear Ashok

We are using following pricing condition for non-refundable taxes ( for non-exciseable unit)

JMIP  - BEDINVENTP

JEC3 - ECSINVENTP

JSEI  - AT1INVENTP

JMX1 - BEDSETOFFT

JEC2 - ECSSETOFFT

JHX1 - AT1SETOFFT

Regards

[former_member192897 · Accepted solution]

The las three condition types are for Set off conditions. Please use the said three condition types for Inv. scenario.

JEX2 ECSINVENTT

JHX2 AT1INVENTT

JMX2 BEDINVENTT

For Cenvatable / Deductible use the following condition types:

JEX1 ECSSETOFFT

JHX1 AT1SETOFFT

JMX1 BEDSETOFFT

[brinda_r · Accepted solution]

Hi Anjali,

Include JEX2 condition also in J_1IEXCDEFN table.

This is what am telling right from the first reply.

Brinda

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Dear Ashok and Brinda

In my system JEX2 is missing , can u pl. guide me the creation of same . the similar to that JEC4 is present but not working properly.

Thanks & Regards

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi Brinda

We are not having jex2 condition but similar to this is jec4 which is also - ECSINVENTT.

Now the values are flowing in PO , but while doing migo , only Jmip is getting inventorised and rest two condition are not .

Kindly guide.

Regards

Anjali

[former_member192897 · Accepted solution]

You may create it in OBQ1 transaction if its already not there.

Condition class D

Calculation type A

Access Sequence JTAX (Or a copy of it if created) and insert in your tax procedure as well under Classify condition types (J_1IEXCDEFN) JEX2 - ECSINVENTT

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi Ashok,

Created jex2 , attached to procedure also. Now the PO is showing perfect values, the JEXS  and nvs is also coming perfectly. But now while doing migo , it is only inventorising the Jmip value and not of 2% and 1% of it.

Can u pl. guide

[former_member192897 · Accepted solution]

Check whether you are getting the CESS (JEC2), SEcess (JSEI) values in Excise item tab of MIGO.

You must classify the required condition types in J_1IEXCDEFN table then only you will get the values in excise tab.

Check whether you have maintained the condition records for JMIP, JEC2, JSEI, JMX2, JEX2, JHX2.

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Was able to resolved, as both the condition ie jec4 and jex2 were prevailing the system was not giving the result properly.  Deleted condition jec4 and now working properly.

With all above changes , I am facing new challenge of JVRD, this is now not getting calculated properly.

Any help !!

Regards

[brinda_r · Accepted solution]

Hi,

Can u attach screenshot of PO > taxes?

Brinda

[former_member192897 · Accepted solution]

Aren't you able to see the value against your JVRD condition type in your PO taxes tab? Ensure you have maintained the condition record with a proper validity start date..

Share your PO taxes tab screen shot..

[Former Member]

Thanks Brinda / Ashok.

checked the JVRD condition in table , no duplicates found. the Base 363 is also assigned. The same condition is prevailing in Quality and production , here the JVRD calculation is going fine.

However my major problem of excise tax is resolved, hence closing the thread.

Thanks once again.

Regards

[Former Member]

Dear Brinda / Ashok

As shared earlier the problem of Excise taxes is been resolved. As per your guidance , created JEX2, JHX2 AND JMX2 . As the earlier JEC4 was also present the system was not giving proper result, after deleting the JEC4 the excise taxes are coming properly.

The problem of JVRD is I feel due to some problem in access sequence , which I am not able to get it. Sharing the screen shot of the same. JVRD amount is not exactly 5% as stated. and analysis of pricing shows last sequence missing.

Regards

[brinda_r]

Hi Anjali,

Is JVRD condition classified correctly in J_1IEXCDEFN table?

There should not be two conditions with same condition name in J_1IEXCDEFN table.

brinda

[former_member192897]

Ensure there is no duplicate VAT condition type assigned in J_1IEXDEFN table under classification APLST. If it is there the remove the copy of JVRD.

Also check whether you have assigned the Base 363 against your JVRD condition type in you tax procedure.