Judgment B.N. Mahapatra, J. This Writ Petition has been filed with a prayer to quash the notice dated 20.08.2014 (Annexure-3) issued by opposite party No.1-Deputy Commissioner, Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax, Cuttack Division, Cuttack for recovery of Rs.11,44,54,732/- levied towards interest from the petitioner. The further prayer of the petitioner is for issuance of a writ of mandamus to opposite parties for not taking any coercive action against the petitioner pursuant to issuance of Annexure-3 until disposal of the writ petition. 2. Mr. J. Sahoo, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that Rs.11,44,54,732/- sought to be recovered from the petitioner relates to levy of interest for the period 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14. It was submitted that as against the interest levied for the year 2010-11, the petitioner has filed an appeal before opposite party No.3-Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Bhubaneswar along with a petition for stay of recovery of the interest amount till disposal of the appeal. The petitioner has made pre-deposit of Rs.4,94,38,896/-for the said year for filing the appeal. The said Appeal and stay petition are pending adjudication before opposite party No.3. Similarly, with regard to the recovery of demand pertaining to year 2011-12 and 2012-13, the petitioner has requested opposite party No.1 and opposite party No.2-Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax, Bhubaneswar to reconcile the petitioner’s payment position and to ascertain the petitioner’s actual liability. For the year 2011-12 and 2012-13 the petitioner had already deposited Rs.1,84,57,996/-which was not taken into account while raising aforesaid demand of Rs.11,44,54,732/-. Mr. Sahoo further submitted that the petitioner had paid Rs.15,97,823/- towards interest for the year 2013-14. Further case of Mr. Sahoo is that on 15.09.2014, the petitioner has filed an appeal against the demand of interest amounting Rs.2,32,13,169/- for the year 2011-12 before opposite party No.3 along with a petition for stay of recovery of demand till disposal of the appeal. The petitioner has made a pre-deposit of Rs.17,40,788/- for filing of appeal before the appellate authority for the year 2011-12. It was submitted that levy of interest of Rs.2,32,13,169/- for the year 2011-12 is barred by limitation. Therefore, Mr. Sahoo prays for passing of appropriate order restraining the opposite parties from taking any coercive action against the petitioner in terms of Annexure-3. Mr. It was submitted that levy of interest of Rs.2,32,13,169/- for the year 2011-12 is barred by limitation. Therefore, Mr. Sahoo prays for passing of appropriate order restraining the opposite parties from taking any coercive action against the petitioner in terms of Annexure-3. Mr. Sahoo further submitted that since no officer has been posted as the Commissioner (Appeals), the appeals along with the stay petitions filed by the petitioner could not be disposed of and pending disposal of stay petition opposite parties are not justified to take any coercive action against the petitioner. 3. Mrs. M. Padhi, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the opposite party-Department submitted that the interest for the years 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13 has been levied for delayed payment of the admitted service tax as per petitioner’s own return. The petitioner has challenged the levy of entire amount of interest which it is statutorily liable to pay. Interest is mandatory on the short payment, late payment of service tax. Besides, no appeal lies against levy of interest. Levy of interest is mandatory under Section 75 of the Finance Act and there is no question of limitation for levy of interest as ST-3 returns were assessed and the service tax liability has already been met. 4. Undisputedly, in the present case, the petitioner preferred appeal against the levy of interest pertaining to years 2010-11 and 2011-12 along with petitions for stay of recovery of the interest amount till disposal of the appeal. While preferring appeal, the petitioner made a pre-deposit as stated above. Petitioner asserted to have made deposit of Rs.1,84,57,996/- against levy of interest for the years 2011-12 and 2012-13 and Rs.15,97,823/- for the year 2013-14. However, the petitioner has filed a computation of interest sheet in course of hearing as per which it admits payment of balance amount of Rs.2,17,47,848/-. Being asked by this Court, Mrs. Padhi submitted that very shortly the Commissioner (Appeals) shall be posted. 5. However, the petitioner has filed a computation of interest sheet in course of hearing as per which it admits payment of balance amount of Rs.2,17,47,848/-. Being asked by this Court, Mrs. Padhi submitted that very shortly the Commissioner (Appeals) shall be posted. 5. In view of the fact that appeal has been filed by the petitioner for the years 2010-11 and 2011-12 along with petitions for stay of realization of the demand raised towards interest and the same are pending before the Commissioner (Appeals) and that the petitioner has made certain payments against the demanded amount, besides payment towards pre-deposit, this writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the opposite parties not to take any coercive action against the petitioner till disposal of the stay petition or appeal by the Commissioner (Appeals) whichever is earlier subject to petitioner paying the sum of Rs.2,17,47,848/- (Rupees two crores seventeen lakhs forty seven thousand eight hundred forty-eight) in two equal instalments, first of which shall be payable by 8th of October, 2014 and the second by end of October, 2014. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion regarding maintainability of the appeals filed by the petitioner before the Commissioner (Appeals) or merit of the said appeals. I. Mahanty, J. I agree.