PER CURIAM.
The only questions raised by the petitioner in this case are whether the Tax Court erred in finding as a fact that petitioner had acquired from Holland Engineering Company a contract between that company and E.H. Heckett giving the company, its successors and assigns, the right to the free use of Heckett's patents and whether the court erred in refusing to grant petitioner's motion for rehearing so as to permit the introduction of additional, but not after-discovered, evidence on this point. Our examination of the record satisfies us that the Tax Court's finding in question was not clearly erroneous and that the Court's refusal to grant a rehearing did not constitute reversible error.
Accordingly the decision of the Tax Court will be affirmed