Whenever the Buddha and his retinue were invited to the palace of a great King or a big merchant, the suttas don't forget to mention the feast was delicious and rich.
Then King Prasenajit, for the sake of his father, the late king, arranged on the day of mourning a vegetarian feast and invited the Buddha to the side rooms of the palace. He welcomed the Tathagata in person with a vast array of superb delicacies of unsurpassed wonderful flavors and himself invited the great Bodhisattvas. SS 1:121
Of course the Buddha was never attached to such things, as we are told he ate grass meant to feed horses offered by a stablehand with the same beatific smile as he ate palace delicacies.
Yet, how is it that when high beds, and perfumes and all manner of luxuries are disallowed, throwing a feast or banquet is actually encouraged as a means of merit making for the lay follower? Especially when one considers how this sets apart the poor lay follower who can only afford to feed the occasional monk on his alms rounds.
A casual analysis of monastic accounts over the ages reveals to me a general tendency for monks to even look forward to such feasts. I can imagine there are good reasons for this loophole - after all, a feast probably was a good source of much needed calories while living in the forest.
Still it is one of those odd things - who in their right mind could think they could honor the Buddha with a feast? If anything, he probably favored the simple flavors of fruits of the forest over puddings and rich food.