- 4 - Collection Information Statement for Businesses, and return it by March 28, 2005, so that collection options could be considered. Ms. Derrick attached to the letter “literal transcripts” of petitioner’s tax liability. In response, petitioner mailed a letter, dated March 24, 2005, to Ms. Derrick, which provided that petitioner was requesting a “face to face conference” and “The legitimate issues we wish to discuss are delay and issues of mishandling of this matter.” A telephonic hearing was held on March 30, 2005. That same day Ms. Derrick mailed to petitioner a letter that requested specific documents and information that would facilitate the Appeals Office’s determination as to whether petitioner was entitled to a face-to-face hearing. The letter requested, inter alia, that petitioner complete and return Form 433-B, a copy of which was attached, and explain with supporting documentation why petitioner did “not owe a tax liability for the Form 1120 for the tax year 2000.” The letter informed petitioner that if Ms. Derrick did not receive the relevant information by April 13, 2005,3 she would issue a notice of determination. As of April 18, 2005, petitioner had not provided the requested information. On May 20, 2005, respondent mailed to petitioner the above- mentioned Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) 3The letter actually stated the date as Apr. 13, 2004, which was a typographical error as the letter was dated Mar. 30, 2005.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 NextLast modified: November 10, 2007