Activate BSEG-EBELN & EBELP in accounting document AA for posting key 70

[Former Member]

Hello,

I would like to post an Down Payment transaction type through FB01 this way:

Header: Document type AA

line item 1: Posting key 31 Vendor number

line item 2: Posting key 70 Asset number transaction type 180.

Is it possible to set up the FI environment to pick up the Purchase Order and Purchase Order Item for the line item 2 or 1?

Thank you in advance for your answers

Regards

[ajaycwa1981]

Hi

You can use substitution OBBH and write exit RGGBS000 to populate the PO No

br, Ajay M

[Former Member]

Dear Ajay,

Actually, I have checked the GGB1, but the BSEG-EBELN is not listed in the substitution fields characteristics.

Regards

[Former Member]

Ajay, would be you able to expand on how you built your substitution? I too am not seeing EBELN/EBELP as subsitutable fields.

Thank you,

Linda

[ajaycwa1981]

Hi

Go to Se16 - Table GB01...

remove the X for the Field BSEG-EBELN in table GB01.. Ask your ABAP consultant to do this

br, Ajay M

[Former Member]

Ajay,

Thank you for your reply, I was very helpful.

Regards,

Linda

[Former Member]

This message was moderated.

[former_member205041]

Hi,

the purchase order number BSEG-EBELN & EBELP is only validated for the special G/L transactions downpayment postings, not for normal FB01 (or f-02) postings which do not contain the special G/L transaction downpayment.

A purchase order number on the line item of a FI document only makes sense if this FI document has a relationship to this purchase order and if the corresponding purchase order history gets an entry with this FI document.

So for normal FB01/f-02 postings without special G/L transaction downpayment the purchase order number is not necessary. If it is entered, it is only contained in the FI document, not for example in the purchase order history in module MM, and so it is not validated. (regardless of whether there is a matchcode is available).

regards Bernhard

[Former Member]

Dear Kirchner,

Actually, the accounting team would like to use the F-48 transaction to record Down Payment regarding the purchasing of Fixed Asset through MM.

F-48 triggers the asset transaction type 180 and allows to fill in the following informations:

- Purchase order

- Purchase order item

- Asset number

This transaction is usefull nevertheless the problem is linked to the asset transaction type 180 that record the down payment in the APC value of the asset.

When the receipt of the asset occurs, the APC value take into account the value of the down payment and the value of the receipt, therefore the APC value is wrong.

Besides, the APC value in decreased when the F-54 is carried out, the F-54 can be applied only if the MIRO have been recorded.

If the first Depreciation run occurs before the receipt of the invoice and the management of the down payment clearing, the depreciation value is wrong.

I have found a solution by filling in a Internal order in the account assignment tab in the purchase order.

The down payment won't be manage in the asset. But the Internal order filled in the purchase order will allow to make the link between the down payment and the asset.

Regards

[former_member205041]

Hi,

I have found another workaround to display the fields EBLEN and EBELP, the procedure is the following:

- Please go to tr.OBVU and add fields BSEG-EBELN and BSEG-EBELP to the list of special fields.

- Later, please run program RFPOSXEXTEND and BALVBUFDEL.

- Then choose these fields in your line item display.

- Make sure that you are using the special fields and not the standard fields. The difference can be seen when you click with the right mouse button on the 'Change layout' screen when you are adding or deleting fields. You can then choose the option 'Show technical field names' and choose the fields 1-U_EBELN, 1-U_EBELP.

Attached notes may be helpful:

0207436 - Line items: unfilled fields / double special field

0320366 - Line items: display special field via menu path

0215798 - FBL*N: Special fields are not displayed

(It should be also possible to create a substitution as per Ajay.I have never tried but this workaround has been used from customer)

regards Bernhard