https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303434 A restaurant's compulsory service charge, when clearly disclosed on the menu card and outside the premises before the order was placed, was not treated as deceptive merely because the reasons for the levy were not separately explained. In the absence of any statutory prohibition, proof of market restriction, or loss of real customer choice between dining in and take-away service, the additional charge was regarded as part of the price structure for table service rather than a compulsory tip. The allegations of unfair trade practice and restrictive trade practice were therefore not established, and the complaint failed. en-us Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 22 Jul 2022 12:50:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303434 A restaurant's compulsory service charge, when clearly disclosed on the menu card and outside the premises before the order was placed, was not treated as deceptive merely because the reasons for the levy were not separately explained. In the absence of any statutory prohibition, proof of market restriction, or loss of real customer choice between dining in and take-away service, the additional charge was regarded as part of the price structure for table service rather than a compulsory tip. The allegations of unfair trade practice and restrictive trade practice were therefore not established, and the complaint failed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303434