House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dan Rostenkowski (D-Ill.) warned yesterday that if the Senate does not abide by a prohibition against tax-bill sweeteners, he will not feel obliged to, either.

Rostenkowski's statement presaged a tough line on the tax-increase portion of the deficit-reduction agreement announced Friday.

The budget agreement, signed by President Reagan and congressional leaders, contains a provision that allows for $9 billion in tax increases for the current fiscal year. But at White House insistence, Congress must not lace the tax legislation with revenue-cutting benefits for individuals and corporations.

That proviso angered Rostenkowski. His panel passed a tax-increase bill earlier this year that contains about $2 billion in tax sweeteners, which committee chairmen have traditionally dispensed to members who show loyalty.

House adherence to the no-sweetener rule, Rostenkowski said, "is dependent on the Senate passing a bill that contains no revenue-losers . . . . {If} the Senate bill contains any revenue-losing provision, all revenue-losing provisions in the House bill" will be subject to a House-Senate conference.

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Lloyd Bentsen (D-Tex.) said yesterday that he will convene his panel Tuesday to discuss how to shape a bill in light of the budget agreement. Bentsen said he will not include a revenue-losing measure that he favors, repeal of the windfall profits tax on crude oil, in his committee's tax bill.

Rostenkowski, apparently anticipating this maneuver, said in his statement: "I expect a restriction against revenue-losers to apply to other legislation in the 100th Congress. This means that a revenue-losing provision contained in any other bill must be offset by increased revenues."