20.2.2023
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 63/21
If the answer to previous question is yes, does the fact that a plan which has as its objective the allocation of resources, mean that it must be treated as a budgetary plan within the meaning of Article 3(8)? 3.
Must Article 5, and Annex 1, of the SEA Directive be interpreted to mean that where an environmental assessment is required under Article 3(1), the environmental report for which provision is made therein should, once reasonable alternatives to a preferred option are identified, carry out an assessment of the preferred option and the reasonable alternatives on a comparable basis?
If the answer to previous question is yes, is the requirement of the Directive met if the reasonable alternatives are assessed on a comparable basis prior to the selection of the preferred option, and thereafter the draft plan or programme is assessed and a more complete SEA assessment then carried out in regard to the preferred option only?
(1)
Directive 2001/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 2001 on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment (OJ 2001, L 197, p. 30).
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Varhoven administrativen sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 29 November 2022 — Direktor na Direktsia ‘Obzhalvane i danachno-osiguritelna praktika’ — Sofia pri Tsentralno upravlenie na NAP v ‘Valentina Heights’ EOOD (Case C-733/22) (2023/C 63/27) Language of the case: Bulgarian Referring court Varhoven administrativen sad
Parties to the main proceedings Appellant in cassation: Direktor na Direktsia ‘Obzhalvane i danachno-osiguritelna praktika’ — Sofia pri Tsentralno upravlenie na NAP Respondent in cassation: ‘Valentina Heights’ EOOD
Questions referred 1.
Must Article 98(2) of, in conjunction with point 12 of Annex III to, Council Regulation 2006/112/EC (1) of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax be interpreted as meaning that the reduced rate made available in that provision for accommodation provided in hotels and similar establishments may be applied where those establishments have not been categorised in accordance with the national legal provisions of the Member State requesting the preliminary ruling[?] 2.
If that question is answered in the negative, must Article 98(2) of, in conjunction with point 12 of Annex III to, Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax be interpreted as meaning that it allows the reduced rate to be applied selectively to concrete and specific aspects of a given category of supply, in the case where the application of the reduced rate is subject to the condition that ‘accommodation provided in hotels and similar establishments’ may take place only in accommodation facilities which have been categorised in accordance with the national legal provisions of the Member State requesting the preliminary ruling, or in respect of which a provisional certificate attesting to the commencement of categorisation proceedings has been issued[?]
(1)
Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1).