Judgment Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, as well as the learned Government Advocate (Taxes) appearing on behalf of the respondent. 2. The main contention of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner is that the respondent had passed the impugned Order, dated 06.08.2012, erroneously, without passing an order, under Section 22 (2) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act 2006, accepting the returns filed by the petitioner. Only thereafter, if the respondent chooses to pass a revised Assessment Order, under Section 27 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, he could have done so, after issuing a prior notice to the petitioner. However, the respondent had not followed the said procedure, while passing the impugned order, dated 06.08.2012. 3. The learned Government Advocate (Taxes) appearing on behalf of the respondent had not refuted the said submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. 4. In view of the above, the impugned order of the respondent, dated 06.08.2012, is set aside. Accordingly, the writ petition stands allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.