Final answer:
The Tea Act of 1773 is correctly described as allowing tax exemptions and rebates, which led to reduced tea prices in the colonies. However, it also caused dissension and protest among American colonists who opposed British parliamentary authority and 'no taxation without representation.'
Step-by-step explanation:
The statement, "The Tea Act of 1773 offered tax exemptions and rebates for tea coming from British-East India Company resulting in cheap tea being sold in the colonies and lowering the price of tea." is true. The Act allowed the British East India Company to bypass import duties and middlemen, enabling it to sell tea at lower prices than the smuggled Dutch tea and undercut the smuggling trade.
However, even with the lower prices, the Tea Act fostered great resentment among colonists who saw it as a tool for exerting British control and maintaining the principle of 'no taxation without representation.' Moreover, it granted a de facto monopoly to the East India Company, impacting colonial tea merchants and igniting deeper anger over continued taxation through the Townshend duties.
Parliament's intention with the Tea Act was not to punish colonists, but rather to provide economic support to the nearly bankrupt East India Company. Nevertheless, the act spurred a critical response, including protests and calls for boycotts among American colonists who opposed the Tea Act as another form of parliamentary overreach and taxation imposition.