Get receipt lines can be done repeatedly in purchase invoice.

Dear All,

I am using NAW14.00.02. I am trying to use get receipt lines in the purchase invoice, but I am facing problems that is I can do that more than once, so in the purchase invoice line can consists of multiple of the same items. I thought if I have press OK button in the get receipt lines table, the items in the line will be dissappear. How to solve this problem or am I wrong ?? your answers are welcome. tks beforehand.

Rgds,

Johnson

You will not be able to post the invoice with two identical receipt lines fetched anyway.

The problem with removing it from the list of available lines is that you might delete them afterwards in the invoice.

So the list shows you those lines which are not fully invoiced yet (Qty. Shipped Not Invoiced field, or so)

Those lines are not shown aftert you have posted the invoice and retry to fetch the same line again.

By the way: You will face the same problem with Shipment lines in the sales side.

The only option to overcome this would be to check (when copying the lines) if the same line already exists in the target document.

I think navision can directly delete the get receipt lines data after I press Ok and selects all items in the line. So it means that it’s not a bug, isn’t it ??

Rgds,

Johnson

Dear Johnson,

I also am wondering why it doesn’t deletes automatically if I have using get receipt lines in the purchase invoice. I am afraid if the purchase administration staff can do it repeatedly. something must prevent this one.

Rgds,

I would say it’s not a bug but a behavior which could be improved.

Either by Microsoft or by a navision developer at a partner.

I can see the problems you are facing. Even though that Navision would not accept the posting of a document where the same receipt line has been fetched more than once, it can be a lot of work to identify the duplicates in the lines (especially when spread over different documents).

I think it is just to keep consistancy, you may ger 2 invoices for 1 receipt, one for line 1 and the other for line 2, so that makes the get receipt function ok as is.

If you look at the way Navision posts shipments, receipts and invoices it puts all the order line on every time.

So maybe in codeunts 80 and 90 you / they could add a function when Everything is Invoiced, to find any Invoices that are on the system, linked to the Original Order and delete them (TRUE) as you will never be allowed to post them.

Actually Thomas, I marked this topic as Resolved, since your original reply is the correct and proper solution.

Basically it would be totally wrong for Navision to mark the shipment once added to an invoice. Imagine that soemone did a combine shipments, but then did not invoice, and later a person goes back to invoice the original order. Hmm actualy there are many any reasons why this is correct.

I suggest that your suggest is better, and couldbe implemented a numebr of ways.

The easisest is to add a flow field the the Purchase line that sould show if the particular line is curently on an Un invoiced invoice line waiting to post, as an integer, it would also show if the line had been pulled more than once.

A second option, would be when the user runs the combine function, that the fucntion checks if that line is already existing on this particular invocie, and if so, skips it.

Hi

Also as a simple functional check you really should be checking the value of the invoice in Navision actually matches the value of the physical invoice you are processing, in this way your own processing will prevent bringing the lines on twice and trying to post it. This needs to be checked for tax discrepancies etc.

Anyway if you are looking for real issues use serial numbers, receive 6 in and then try and use get receipts to invoice only 3 [:)] Maybe fixed in SP2 I have not yet checked.

Hi David,

You are correct about what you said. It must be added some changes when I want to use get receipt lines so that someone can’t do it repeatedly. Now I think this topic can be closed and solved. For all those that has given answers, you are the best…

Rgds,

Johnson