Skip to Content

SD/FI-CA Invoice Reversal: cleared FI-CA receivable


After corrections made under the somewhat confusing Note 1889972 - SD/FI-CA: SD invoice reversal creates offsetting entry, an attempt to reverse SD Invoice posted to FI-CA, where the FI-CA document has already been cleared (paid), does not immediately result in error message >0092 raised on the FI-CA side of "posting interface" (FKK_RWIN_DOCUMENT_CHECK_REV) anmore - the control is reverted to RV_ACCOUNTING_DOCUMENT_CREATE via exception reverse_impossible (rather than error_message), which in turn will then attempt to create a new "offsetting entry" in FI-CA.

A cryptic information message VF208 is displayed:

and, should the Posting Area 1200 lack the Main/Sub transaction settings for creating new "offsetting entry", an error message >R017 is displayed.

The message >0092, which would guide the user to simply manually reset the clearing in FI-CA and then successfully release SD Cancellation Document, is lost (at least in VF02 and VFX3).

We don't want to enable creation of the new "offsetting entry" in FI-CA (change the way system was set up 6 years ago) as long as there is a chance to simply reverse the original FI-CA document...

I don't see how to achieve this without modifying FI-CA side "of posting interface" (FORM message_raising_rev_imposs in LFKR0F06) to raise ERROR_MESSAGE instead of REVERSE_IMPOSSIBLE for particular FI-CA errors. Can anyone think of a better way to solve this?

Is it worth, for example, trying to reset clearing prior to FKK_RWIN_DOCUMENT_CHECK_REV (in the same LUW), and if yes - what would be the appropriate place/user exit to try to integrate something like that?

Can anyone advise on possible negative side effects, if I change how particular errors are raised?

Is it worth trying to report this to SAP..? :)

We are on SAP_APPL 617 SP 0009, SAP_FIN 617 SP 0009, FI-CA 617SP 0009.

Thank you,

Add comment
10|10000 characters needed characters exceeded

  • Edit in: after looking at corrections for Note 1889972 again - my assumption, that this behavior was introduced by this particular note is wrong... The rest of the problem description is still applicable.

    And I cant edit the question... - "Internal error" screen is displayed :|

  • Get RSS Feed

0 Answers