Microsoft Dynamics 365
Yes absolutely needed for a smooth workflow. Otherwise, one is touching multiple documents to get a shipment out fully so that invoicing can occur.
This should also be done on the Warehouse Receipt side as well.
Today is June 24/2022 still waiting for the fixed asset
Administrator on 11/11/2021 4:28:42 PM
Thrilled to announce this feature released in 2022 Release Wave 1 APP 10.0.24.
When a negative fixed asset is acquired, you must set "allow negative net book value" on the fixed asset. However, when a negative fixed asset is depreciated Dynamics 365 for Finance and Operations cannot calculate a depreciation proposal. The periodic depreciation therefore must be calculated and posted manually via a journal. This is time consuming when it could just be calculated in the proposal. Please allow negative assets to be included for depreciation in the depreciation proposal.
Category: Fixed assets
Post A Comment
You can sell Resources but you cannot Purchase Resources?
Strongly necessary, Retentions in Sales and Purchases also urgent.
Is not a standardizing issue? If you post a General Journal you can reverse it.
This should be the same in all Journals and Registers.
This is needed for a lot of situations.
We should allow this on warehouse receipts as well.
It's cumbersome to need to receive items on warehouse receipts and go back to the PO to receive in the non-inventory items.
Important functionality for Brazil
I agree that this would be a benefit to have product name visible when "TABLE" is the item relation on the trade agreement journal line. And if a "GROUP" is used as the relation, then display the description of the group code in that same column of the grid. if "All" is the relation, then just leave the column blank. Same goes for Account - should how name of customer or vendor, name of group or blank if "All" is used.
We would love BOTH Tracking Dimension Group and Storage Dimension Group to be available via "insert columns" on the Released Products grid! We are upgrading soon from AX 2012 to F&O and this is something we'll be losing. It was in AX, why not in F&O? (I don't think this was something we had customized in AX since it would have come over to F&O with Migration Factory if it was.)