arguments were premised on the concept of allocation. It was not until after this Court issued its opinion that the State took the position that 7-Eleven’s software-development charge should be characterized as “a single charge for a single license in the form of Golden Masters, not a price per copy.” In support of this position, the State cites the Comptroller’s “longstanding and consistent policy” that “the purchase of cism that a non-movant could ‘lay behind the log in the trial court and urge deficiencies for the first time on appeal.” Clear Creek, 589 S.W.2d at 677. Furthermore, a party to an appeal is not entitled to raise new issues for the first time in a motion for rehearing. See E.F. Hutton & Co. v. Youngblood, 741 S.W.2d 363, 364 (Tex.1987) (per curiam) (op. on reh’g) (<HOLDING>). “[T]he sole purpose of a motion for rehearing
holding that where party made argument for first time in motion for rehearing in court of appeals error if any was waived holding that an argument raised for the first time in a rule 59e motion is waived on appeal holding argument forfeited if raised for the first time in a motion to reconsider holding that under the circumstances of that case an argument made for the first time in a motion for rehearing was waived holding a party waives an argument made for the first time on reply