cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

VA88 - Error list of settlement run displays irrelevant sales orders

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi All,

This is a problem relating to transaction VA88 for settlement of sales orders into COPA. The error list of the settlement run is unnecessarily long since it also includes old, irrelevant sales orders that have no postings since the last VA88 run.

'Old' sales orders without recent postings on them are considered in the settlement run despite having the indicator "check trans. data" switched on in the VA88 selection screen.

What could be the reason???

Ideally, system should ignore the irrelevant sales orders (those without any transactional postings since the last settlement) if we select the "check transactional data" option in the VA88 selection screen

Any suggestions, thoughts, solutions would be highly appreciated.

Regards,

Soumya

Edited by: Soumya Bhattacharya on Mar 17, 2009 10:42 AM

Accepted Solutions (0)

Answers (2)

Answers (2)

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi

please check whether any SAP OSS notes tobe applied in your system.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Soumya

Please see below. Transaction data checks are not made in the following situations, even

if the indicator is set:

1. The sender has a results analysis key, and an accrual calculation

was already executed. In Customizing for accrual calculation, line

item updates are not active for a version relevant for settlement.

2. The sender has a variance key and variances have already been

determined.

3. The sender is a capital investment measure and has the technically

completed status. Alternatively, the sender is an investment measur

and the settlement was started with processing type 3.

4. The settlement rule was changed since the last settlement.

5. There is a valid distribution rule for fixed amounts.

6. Both a periodic distribution rule and an overall distribution rule

have been defined for the settlement of costs with the same origin,

and only the periodic distribution rule was used for the last

settlement.

Basically you should see if any of these scenarios exist in your case. Item no. 6 looks like the most probable cause. Please check them again.

Hope this helps. Let me know.

Karthik