No change of inventory posting when posting a product receipt on a purchase order with negative quantity

Finance and Operations/AX User Forum
1

Hi

We have the following problem:
On a purchase order, when we post the receipt, a posting of the inventory that shows an increase in the stock is done. (in Belgian accounting 609XXX account)

However, when we create an identical purchase order, only with a negative quantity. - this posting of stock seems to be missing.

We have tried several scenario’s to find the reason for this (scrap, played with parameters on the item model group, RMA number, used a returned order, etc.) but the result stays the same. The posting that shows the decrease in our stock is missing.

Does anyone have any idea about the reason of this problem?

Thanks a lot!

2

The line as a unit price I presume? What are the ledger entries it actually creates?

3

Hi

Thanks for your response

Hereby i show the the postings of the 2 scenario’s

  1. posting of product receipt of purchase order with positive quantity

  2. posting of product receipt of purcahse order with negative quantity.

600000 Purchase of raw materials 100 d
300000 Acquisition value of inventory raw materials 100 d
@ 609011 Change in inventory 100 c
@ 444000 Invoices to be received 100 c

444000 Invoiced to be received 100 d
@ 300000 acquistion value of inventory raw materials 92.02c
@ 600000 Purchase of raw materias 7.98 c
→ No posting made on 609* account (change in inventory)

4

You have the concept of the physical and the financial voucher - are you looking at both in point 2?

5

Both parameters (post physical inventory/post financial inventory) are on on the item model group.

6

The vouchers are split physical and financial - so when you return it you are removing stock. Look at both vouchers for the GL entries.

7

Hi

Looks like we found the problem.

In this version of AX , there is an extra line of code in the Invent_MovPurch Class whch is the reason this posting is missing.

This line of code is nowhere to be found in for example later versions (CU10)- so we solved this by just commenting this line of code.

Thanks a lot.

8

Wow! Not seen that in an earlier version so luckily bypassed it!

Glad you sorted it in the end :slight_smile: