@russell.picot Nikos has asked me to send you this message: the plan you mention is the so called “Avrukh plan” , advocated by Avrukh in his legendary Catalan series and it is always a strong and practical way to play the position.
He will be able to log in in a few days and will give you more details.
Thanks Nikos - I am really looking forward to what you can share!
Very best wishes
Hi Just following up to see if Nikos had been able to share his thoughts on this?
Many thanks
Thank you Raluca!
Hey @russell.picot, that’s a very interesting question.
When Black doesn’t take on e4, you have two options:
Boris Avrukh answered pragmatically in his Catalan series. Always play e4-e5 and always take on d5. In this way, you have a very dangerous attack, KIA style (as you said, play h4-Nh2, bring the bishop to the other diagonal after Bg2-Bf1 etc).
Once, my friend GM Grivas told me that another pragmatic way to play the position is let the pawn on e4 and develop the rooks, for example Re1 and Rad1. Black will be thinking on every turn if they want to take (which is the best move anyway) and they will only lose time. If they don’t take, then you play e5 under much better circumnstances.
As you may know from my course and books, I am not a pragmatic analyst 
I try to find the best plan in each situation, if that’s possible.
In my experience, playing e4-e5 is the most ambitious plan always, but it isn’t certain if you should take on d5 or not. After e4-e5, you should consider if Black has counterplay. The only way they do is with …c5, with dxc4, or not. This means that the knight should go to e8 and then to c7.
In your example, Black played the queen to c7. This takes away the square for the knight, so I’d go e4-e5 and then maybe h4-Rfe1 and even Ng5. So, I wouldn’t take on d5 just yet.
When Black plays Qb8 and Nc7, i’d think how I can meet …c5. Many times, this is in White’s favor, as after the center opens up, White is just better developed.
So, the answer is “depends”. All 3 approached are valid:
a) Develop the rooks before e4-e5 (GM Grivas plan)
b) Always play e5 and cxd5 (Avrukh’s plan)
c) Always play e4-e5 but don’t play cxd5 just yet (Nikos’ ambitious and very concrete approach)
Does this help? Or I managed to confuse you even more?
Hi Nikos First of all apologies for the very long delay in replying to your very thoughtful and insightful message. I probably naturally prefer certainty in my games so have gravitated to the Avrukh plan but with uncertainty in mind and without awareness of the 2 other approaches! Next time I will be sorely tempted to go with the Nikos’ plan!
As ever, I much appreciate the deepness with which you tackle such questions.
With very best wishes
Russell