Law Updates

Subject

Summary: The Bureau of Indian Standards has established eight Indian Standards covering electrical appliances, network access security, metadata registries, and the C++ programming language. All eight standards were established on 24 July 2026. Four of them replace previous editions that will remain valid concurrently until 24 January 2027. For the other four standards, the notification does not identify a previous Indian Standard for withdrawal. For manufacturers, importers and technology businesses, the notification raises an obvious question: does the establishment of these standards make BIS certification immediately mandatory? The short answer is no-not by this notification alone. Establishing an Indian Standard and making it compulsory are two distinct regulatory actions. A separate Quality Control Order, legislation, government direction, certification condition, tender or contract may be required to make compliance mandatory. Therefore, businesses should not rush into a BIS licence application without first determining: Whether the standard applies to their product or activity, Whether a separate law or Quality Control Order makes it mandatory, Which edition must be followed, Whether testing or certification is required, Whether an existing licence or test report needs updating. This compliance update explains the eight standards, implementation dates, business impact, the BIS certification process, potential costs, and the steps organisations should take before the older editions are withdrawn. Key Highlights of the BIS Notification The most important takeaways are: Eight Indian Standards were established on 24 July 2026. Five standards pertain to the safety of household or commercial electrical appliances. Three standards relate to network security, metadata and software. Four standards replace earlier editions. The four previous editions remain valid until 24 January 2027. Four standards have no predecessor identified for withdrawal. The notification does not, by itself, impose blanket BIS certification. Businesses must separately check QCO, regulatory, contractual and procurement requirements. Companies using an older edition should begin their transition assessment immediately. Particular Details Issuing authority Bureau of Indian Standards Administrative department Department of Consumer Affairs Notification date 27 July 2026 Date of establishment 24 July 2026 Total standards established Eight Electrical-appliance standards Five Information-technology standards Three Standards replacing previous editions Four Standards without a predecessor listed Four Withdrawal date for previous editions 24 January 2027 Legal basis Rule 15 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, 2018 Background of the BIS Standards Framework The Bureau of Indian Standards, or BIS, is India's national standards body, responsible for establishing, revising, amending, and withdrawing Indian Standards for goods, articles, processes, systems, and services. Indian Standards provide common benchmarks for areas such as: Product safety, Performance, Quality, Testing, Marking, Terminology, Interoperability, Information management, Technical procurement. BIS can formulate an Indian Standard domestically or adopt a standard developed by an international organisation. This explains why several standards in the notification reference IEC, ISO, or IEEE publications. Legal Basis of the Notification The notification was issued under Rule 15 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, 2018. Rule 15 empowers BIS to establish Indian Standards and to reaffirm, amend, revise or withdraw them when required. The process normally involves consultation with technical experts, government bodies, industry representatives, laboratories, consumers and other stakeholders. The establishment, revision and withdrawal of Indian Standards are formally notified through the Official Gazette. Which Standards Have Been Established? S. No. Indian Standard Product or subject International reference Status Previous edition Withdrawal date 1 IS 302 (Part 2/Sec 16): 2026 Food waste disposers IEC 60335-2-16: 2022 No predecessor listed NA NA 2 IS 302 (Part 2/Sec 26): 2026 Electrical clocks IEC 60335-2-26: 2024 Second revision IS 302-2-26: 2014 24 January 2027 3 IS 302 (Part 2/Sec 36): 2026 Commercial electric cooking ranges, ovens, hobs and hob elements IEC 60335-2-36: 2021 No predecessor listed NA NA 4 IS 302 (Part 2/Sec 49): 2026 Commercial appliances for keeping food and crockery warm IEC 60335-2-49: 2021 No predecessor listed NA NA 5 IS 302 (Part 2/Sec 54): 2026 Household surface-cleaning appliances using liquids or steam IEC 60335-2-54: 2022 No predecessor listed NA NA 6 IS/ISO/IEC/IEEE 8802-1X: 2021 Port-based network access control ISO/IEC/IEEE 8802-1X First revision 2013 edition 24 January 2027 7 IS/ISO/IEC 11179-6: 2023 Metadata registry registration ISO/IEC 11179-6 First revision 2015 edition 24 January 2027 8 IS/ISO/IEC 14882: 2024 C++ programming language ISO/IEC 14882 Second revision 2020 edition 24 January 2027 Scope of the Notification The standards can be divided into two broad categories. Electrical-Appliance Safety The first five standards form part of the IS 302 series, which covers the safety of household and similar electrical appliances. These standards may be relevant to: Electrical-appliance manufacturers, Commercial-kitchen equipment companies, Domestic appliance brands, Importers, Foreign manufacturers, Distributors, Testing laboratories, Hotels and restaurants, Hospitals and institutional kitchens, Government and private procurement agencies. Information Technology and Software The remaining three standards relate to: Port-based network access control, Metadata registry registration, and The C++ programming language. These standards may be relevant to: Network-equipment manufacturers, Cybersecurity service providers, System integrators, Government IT departments, Data-governance teams, Software companies, Compiler developers, Embedded-system manufacturers, Technology procurement teams. The compliance implications are different for each group. An electrical product may be subject to product testing and certification if covered by a mandatory order. An IT or software standard may instead become relevant through procurement, contracts, technical policies, or voluntary adoption. Detailed Explanation of the Eight Standards 1. IS 302 (Part 2/Sec 16): 2026-Food Waste Disposers This standard is based on IEC 60335-2-16: 2022 and relates to the safety of electrically operated food waste disposers. Food waste disposers are typically installed in kitchen sink systems and are designed to break down food waste before disposal. The Gazette does not list an earlier Indian Standard for withdrawal. Businesses should therefore describe it as a standard for which no predecessor is identified in this notification. It should not be claimed that no other safety requirement was previously relevant to these appliances. Who Should Review This Standard? Food waste disposer manufacturers, Kitchen-appliance brands, Modular-kitchen businesses, Importers and distributors, Hotels and restaurants, Builders and institutional buyers, Product testing laboratories. Manufacturers and importers should first compare the product's intended use, design and electrical specifications with the precise scope of the complete standard. They should then check whether a QCO, certification scheme, tender or customer contract makes conformity compulsory. 2. IS 302 (Part 2/Sec 26): 2026-Electrical Clocks This standard is based on IEC 60335-2-26: 2024 and specifies particular safety requirements for electrical clocks. It is the second revision and replaces IS 302-2-26: 2014. However, the previous edition will remain valid until 24 January 2027. Manufacturers should analyze: Models tested in accordance with the 2014 version, Any BIS license that is in place, as applicable, Test reports, Product drawings, Critical parts, Markings and instructions for users, Applications pending, Specification of suppliers. The notification is not a summary of the technical differences between the 2014 and 2026 versions. The assessment of the transition will require a clause-by-clause comparison of all standards. 3. IS 302 (Part 2/Sec 36): 2026-Commercial Electric Cooking Appliances This standard is based on IEC 60335-2-36: 2021. It covers commercial electric cooking ranges, ovens, hobs and hob elements. The standard may be relevant to equipment used in: Hotels, Restaurants, Canteens, Hospitals, Cloud kitchens, Catering facilities, Institutional kitchens, Food-service businesses. No predecessor Indian Standard is identified for withdrawal in the notification. Commercial appliances can differ from ordinary household appliances in their intended use, operating environment, capacity and frequency of operation. A company should not classify a product solely by the words "oven" or "hob." The complete scope and definitions must be reviewed before beginning the BIS certification process. 4. IS 302 (Part 2/Sec 49): 2026-Appliances for Keeping Food and Crockery Warm This standard is based on IEC 60335-2-49: 2021. It concerns commercial electrical appliances used for keeping food or crockery warm. The standard may be relevant to manufacturers and suppliers serving: Restaurants, Hotels, Buffets, Hospitals, Catering businesses, Commercial cafeterias, Institutional kitchens. No previous Indian Standard is listed for withdrawal. Manufacturers should examine the product's commercial purpose, heating method, electrical characteristics and intended operating conditions before deciding that the standard applies. Institutional purchasers may also begin referring to this standard in procurement documents even where no independent QCO makes it mandatory. 5. IS 302 (Part 2/Sec 54): 2026-Liquid- and Steam-Based Surface Cleaners This standard is based on IEC 60335-2-54: 2022 and covers household surface-cleaning appliances that use liquids or steam. The exact scope must be checked before classifying steam cleaners, liquid-based cleaners, or multipurpose cleaning equipment under this standard. Possible impacted industries: Manufacturers of cleaning appliances, Brands of consumer electronics, Importers, Foreign manufacturers, Distributors, Online retailers, Product-testing labs. Importers need to conduct a BIS applicability study before placing a large purchase order or delivering products to India. Finding out that there is a mandatory compliance requirement after delivery could result in storage costs, delayed launches, and retesting. 6. IS/ISO/IEC/IEEE 8802-1X: 2021-Port-Based Network Access Control This standard concerns port-based network access control for local and metropolitan area networks. It replaces the 2013 edition, which is scheduled for withdrawal on 24 January 2027. Port-based network access control helps organisations manage how devices and users obtain access to network infrastructure. The standard may be relevant to: Network-equipment manufacturers, Enterprise security teams, Cybersecurity companies, System integration firms, Managed services providers, IT Projects by Government, Operators of Critical Infrastructure. Companies relying on the old version must carefully examine contracts, technical designs, procurement requirements, and product documentation. The notification does not require every organisation to redesign its network. Applicability may arise through customer requirements, security policies, contracts or public procurement. 7. IS/ISO/IEC 11179-6: 2023-Metadata Registry Registration This standard deals with the registration of metadata in a metadata registry. It replaces the 2015 edition, which will remain valid until 24 January 2027. Metadata registries help organisations maintain structured information about data elements. They may support: Data governance, Common definitions, Information exchange, Data interoperability, Institutional record management, Standardised data dictionaries. The standard may be relevant to government departments, financial institutions, healthcare organisations, digital platforms and large enterprises. Organisations using the previous edition should review their registration procedures, governance roles, metadata status models, approval mechanisms and related software requirements. 8. IS/ISO/IEC 14882: 2024-C++ Programming Language This standard relates to the C++ programming language and replaces the 2020 edition. The earlier edition will remain valid until 24 January 2027. The standard may be relevant to: Software developers, Compiler vendors, Embedded-system manufacturers, Automotive technology companies, Industrial software companies, Government technology projects, Organisations procuring safety-critical software. Its establishment does not mean that every developer using C++ must obtain BIS registration or certification. Its relevance is more likely to arise through compiler conformity, coding policies, technical contracts, procurement requirements, software development standards, or migration to newer C++ capabilities. What Has Changed? The notification creates three broad changes. Four Standards Have No Predecessor Listed No previous Indian Standard is identified for withdrawal for: Food waste disposers, Commercial electric cooking ranges, ovens and hobs, Commercial food- and crockery-warming appliances, Household liquid- or steam-based surface-cleaning appliances. This does not necessarily mean that these products were completely unregulated earlier. Another general safety standard, QCO certification condition, or sector-specific requirement may still be relevant. Four Standards Replace Previous Editions Older editions have been replaced for: Electrical clocks, Network access control, Metadata registry registration, C++ programming language. These previous editions remain concurrently valid until 24 January 2027. Greater Alignment With International Standards The notification adopts the latest editions of IEC, ISO, and IEEE as Indian Standards. This can help align Indian technical practices with more recent international requirements. However, businesses must use the complete Indian editions when determining domestic compliance. What the Notification Does Not Tell Businesses The Gazette identifies the standards, establishment dates, previous editions, and withdrawal dates. It does not provide: Complete technical requirements, Clause-by-clause changes, Product testing methods, Certification procedures, BIS licence fees, Factory-inspection requirements, Penalties for every affected business, Automatic confirmation that certification is mandatory. These questions require review of the complete standard and the applicable regulatory instrument. Implementation Timeline and Transition Norms Date or period Regulatory position Recommended business action 24 July 2026 All eight Indian Standards established Identify applicable products, systems and contracts 27 July 2026 BIS notification dated Begin legal and technical assessment July 2026 to January 2027 Old and new editions run concurrently for four revised standards Compare editions, update products and complete testing Before 24 January 2027 Transition-planning period Resolve certification, documentation and contractual issues 24 January 2027 Listed previous editions scheduled for withdrawal Move to the new edition, subject to applicable BIS directions After 24 January 2027 Previous editions no longer remain concurrently valid under this notification Maintain conformity with the applicable new edition What Does Concurrent Running Mean? Concurrent running allows two editions of an Indian Standard to remain valid for a specified period. Rule 28 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, 2018 permits the Director General of BIS to allow concurrent operation of two versions and determine the transition period. Businesses should use this period for orderly migration. It should not be treated as a reason to wait until January 2027. What About Products Already in the Market? The notification does not provide a universal answer for products manufactured, tested, certified, or imported under an earlier edition. Businesses must separately check: Applicable BIS implementation guidelines, Existing licence conditions, QCO provisions, Acceptance of old test reports, Treatment of products already manufactured, Pending BIS applications, Existing inventory, Contractual obligations. Why Were These Standards Implemented? The notification does not provide a detailed policy explanation for each standard. However, the updates appear consistent with recognised standardisation objectives. Updating Electrical-Safety Benchmarks Electrical appliances and their components continue to evolve. Updated standards can provide more current benchmarks for design, construction, testing and safe use. Aligning India With International Standards The use of newer IEC, ISO and IEEE editions can reduce differences between Indian and international technical practices. This may help manufacturers operating in multiple markets, although Indian regulatory and certification requirements must still be assessed separately. Improving Network Security The network-access-control standard provides an updated technical reference for controlling access to local and metropolitan networks. Strengthening Data Governance The metadata-registry standard can support consistent data definitions, registration procedures and information exchange. Updating Software Specifications The new C++ edition provides a more up-to-date reference for developers, compiler vendors and organisations that specify C++ requirements in contracts or procurement. Impact on Businesses Impact on Manufacturers Manufacturers may need to review product designs, components, drawings, technical files, quality-control plans, testing capabilities, and existing certifications. Where the new edition contains materially different requirements, the manufacturer may need to: Modify product construction, Replace critical components, Update testing equipment, Conduct additional testing, Revise user instructions, Update product marking, Amend supplier specifications, Extend or change an existing licence. The actual changes cannot be confirmed from the Gazette alone. Impact on Importers Importers should check product compliance before placing orders or arranging shipment. A delayed regulatory assessment may result in: Shipment delays, Additional warehousing costs, Product testing after manufacture, Re-labelling, Supplier disputes, Delayed market launch, Certification expenses not included in the original budget. The manufacturer, rather than the importer, may need to hold the BIS licence under certain product-certification schemes. The correct applicant must be identified before filing. Impact on Foreign Manufacturers BIS certification for foreign manufacturers may involve additional documentation and coordination. Depending on the applicable scheme, the process may require: Appointment of an authorised Indian representative, Overseas-factory information, Product testing, Factory inspection, Travel and inspection expenditure, Brand authorisation, Ongoing representation in India. Foreign manufacturers should begin the process well before the planned Indian launch date. Impact on MSMEs Micro and small businesses may face a proportionately greater burden because they may not have: An in-house compliance department, Complete testing infrastructure, Dedicated regulatory personnel, Experience with BIS applications, Sufficient budget for repeated testing, Easy access to specialised laboratories. An early gap analysis can help an MSME avoid unnecessary product modifications and incorrect applications. Impact on Hotels, Restaurants and Institutional Buyers Hotels, hospitals, restaurants, canteens and commercial kitchens may be affected through procurement. Buyers may begin asking suppliers for: Updated conformity evidence, Valid BIS licences, where applicable, Test reports, Product-safety declarations, Confirmation of the relevant Indian Standard, Technical specifications aligned with the new edition. Impact on Technology Companies Technology businesses may need to review: Network-security architecture, IT procurement documents, Customer contracts, Metadata-governance procedures, Data dictionaries, Compiler support, Coding standards, Toolchain policies, Software migration plans. How Businesses Can Achieve Compliance A business should approach the notification through a structured process. Step 1: Complete an Applicability Assessment The business should begin with the product's: Intended use, Technical design, Electrical rating, User category, Operating environment, Manufacturing process, Commercial description. Similar products may fall under different standards. Choosing a standard based only on a product name can result in an incorrect BIS licence application. Step 2: Verify Mandatory Status Search for: Quality Control Orders, Product-specific BIS certification manuals, Regulatory notifications, Applicable conformity-assessment schemes, Tender requirements, Customer contracts, Sector-specific directions. This is one of the most important functions of a BIS certification consultant. Step 3: Obtain the Complete Standard The Gazette is only a notification. It cannot be used as a replacement for the complete technical standard. The complete standard must be reviewed for: Scope, Definitions, Classifications, Construction requirements, Safety requirements, Test methods, Marking, Documentation, Referenced standards. Step 4: Conduct a Gap Analysis For the updated standards, enterprises need to conduct a clause-by-clause comparison between the old and updated editions. Gap analysis will help determine: New requirements, New tests, New definitions, New classification, New references, Product design considerations, Changes in documentation, Requirement for retesting. Step 5: Prepare Technical Documentation Documents may include: Process chart for manufacturing, Factory layout, List of machinery, Testing equipment list, Calibration certificates, Drawings of products, Bills of material, Component specifications, Ratings of product, Product models, Quality control plan, Test reports, Trademark documents. The final document list depends on the product and BIS scheme. Step 6: Complete Product Testing Where testing is required, the business should verify: Laboratory recognition or acceptance, Testing scope, Sample quantity, Testing duration, Test charges, Report validity, Model-grouping rules, Retesting conditions. Choosing the wrong BIS testing laboratory can lead to an unusable report and repeated expenditure. Step 7: Submit the BIS Licence Application A complete application should correctly identify: Manufacturer, Manufacturing unit, Product category, Indian Standard, Product models, Brand, Applicable certification scheme, Test reports, Authorised representatives. Incomplete or inconsistent information can delay the BIS certification process. Step 8: Prepare for Factory Inspection Where factory inspection is required, the manufacturer should ensure that: Production facilities are operational, Testing equipment is available, Calibration certificates are valid, Quality-control procedures are implemented, Technical personnel are present, Records are properly maintained, Product samples can be drawn. Step 9: Update Product Marking The BIS Standard Mark must only be used under a valid licence and within its approved scope. Product marking may need to include: Licence number, Product identification, Model, Rating, Traceability information, Applicable statutory declarations, User and safety instructions. Step 10: Maintain Post-Certification Compliance BIS compliance continues after the licence is granted. Manufacturers may need to maintain: Routine test records, Calibration, Quality-control records, Supplier controls, Complaint records, Correct use of the Standard Mark, Surveillance readiness, Renewal documents, Change notifications, Compliance with later amendments. BIS Certification Cost There is no single BIS certification cost for every product. The total cost depends on the standard, product, certification scheme, testing requirements, and location of the manufacturing unit. Cost component Main factors affecting cost BIS application fee Certification scheme and number of applications Laboratory testing Product complexity, tests, samples and laboratory charges Inspection expenses Factory location and inspection requirements Foreign-manufacturer expenses Overseas inspection, travel and sample shipment Product redesign Nature and number of technical non-conformities Retesting Test failure, sample modification or additional models Marking fee Product category, production volume and licence conditions Professional charges Scope of BIS certification services required Internal compliance cost Staff, equipment, calibration and training Renewal and surveillance Applicable licence and continuing-compliance requirements Businesses should request a product-specific quotation rather than relying on a generic BIS certification cost displayed online. A basic quotation may not include: Government fees, Laboratory charges, Factory inspection, Travel expenses, Sample shipment, Product redesign, Retesting, Additional model coverage, Marking fees, Post-certification support. Risks of Ignoring the Updated Standards Even where a standard is not independently mandatory, ignoring it may create commercial or contractual risks. These can include: Rejection from government or private tenders, Failure to meet customer specifications, Use of an outdated technical reference, Rejection of test reports, Delayed BIS certification, Repeat testing, Product redesign after launch, Supplier disputes, Loss of customer confidence, Network-security weaknesses, Inconsistent metadata governance, Software compatibility issues. Where a separate QCO makes certification mandatory, non-compliance may also lead to enforcement under the applicable order and the BIS Act. The penalties should be linked to the mandatory instrument, not incorrectly attributed solely to this standards-establishment notification. Benefits for Businesses Improved Product Safety Updated electrical appliance standards can support safer product design, manufacturing, and testing. Greater International Alignment International coordination will help reduce the gap between the technical procedures followed in India and those defined internationally by the latest IEC, ISO, and IEEE standards. Better Market Credibility Conformity with recognised standards can improve confidence among customers, institutional buyers, and business partners. Clearer Procurement Standards make it possible for buyers to quantify specifications of products/systems/suppliers. Reduced Product Failure Risk Effective testing and quality control can reduce defects, complaints, recalls, and corrective action expenses. Stronger Network Security The port-based network access control standard can support more consistent authentication and access management practices. Improved Data Governance The metadata-registry standard can help organisations maintain consistent definitions and registration processes. Updated Software Practices The newer C++ standard provides a current reference for compilers, development policies, contracts and procurement. Is This the Right Decision or an Additional Burden? The notification represents necessary technical modernisation, but it may also create short-term costs. Why the Decision Is Beneficial The updated standards can: Replace outdated technical references, Increase product safety, Align internationally, Improve procurement processes, Ensure consistent testing, Improve network security, Support better data governance, Modernise software specifications. Why Businesses May See It as a Burden Businesses may need to spend money on: Purchasing the new standards, Technical interpretation, Product redesign, Laboratory testing, Retesting, BIS certification, Documentation, Supplier changes, Staff training, Software migration. The burden may be greater for MSMEs, foreign manufacturers, and companies with several products or manufacturing units. Balanced Assessment The new standards will be beneficial, as technical requirements change with evolving products and technologies. However, successful implementation depends on: Clear BIS transition guidelines, Adequate laboratory capacity, Reasonable certification timelines, Support for MSMEs, Transparent cost structures, Clarity on mandatory applicability. The standards themselves are not the main problem. The burden arises when businesses do not know whether a standard is mandatory, which edition applies, or what must be done with existing products and certificates. Business Opportunities Created The notification can create new commercial opportunities across compliance, engineering, and technology services. BIS Certification and Product Compliance Services Manufacturers and importers may need help with: Product classification, Standard selection, QCO applicability, BIS licence applications, Documentation, Testing, Inspection preparation, Post-certification compliance. Testing-Laboratory Services Testing laboratories may see increased demand for product evaluation under the new electrical-appliance standards. Product Redesign and Safety Engineering Manufacturers that are now opting for newer standards may require support with components, construction, technical drawings, and safety assessments. Foreign-Manufacturer Compliance Services International brands entering India may need assistance with BIS certification, local representation, testing, and factory inspections. Cybersecurity Consulting The network-access-control standard may create opportunities for: Network-security consultants, Authentication solution providers, System integrators, Security auditors, Managed service providers. Metadata and Data-Governance Services Organizations could seek help with their metadata registries, data dictionaries, governance procedures, and digital transformation projects. C++ Training and Migrations Software firms might need: Developer training, Compiler migration, Codebase analysis, Toolchain validation, Compatibility testing, Coding policy updates. Compliance Technology Platforms Businesses with several products may invest in software for: Certificate tracking, Regulatory monitoring, Test-report management, Supplier compliance, Product-model mapping, Renewal reminders. How Can Corpseed Help? The most difficult part of a BIS compliance update is not reading the standard's name. It is determining whether that standard applies to a specific product and what the business must do next. Corpseed can support manufacturers, importers, startups, and foreign companies through the following services. Product and Standard Applicability Assessment Corpseed can analyze the product description, specifications, purpose, and manufacturing process to determine which Indian Standard applies. This reduces the risk of choosing the wrong standard or submitting an unnecessary application. QCO and Mandatory-Status Assessment Before beginning certification, Corpseed can help determine whether the standard is: Voluntary, Covered by a QCO, Required by another regulation, Included in a tender, Contractually mandatory. BIS Certification Support Where certification is required, Corpseed can assist with: Document checklists, Application preparation, Online filing coordination, Response to application queries, Inspection preparation, Application tracking, Post-certification requirements. BIS Testing Laboratory Coordination Corpseed can help businesses understand the required tests, sample requirements, and appropriate laboratory route. Final laboratory selection must be based on the relevant standard, testing scope, and applicable BIS requirements. Transition Gap Analysis Businesses using a previous edition can be supported in comparing their existing products, reports, and documentation with the updated standard. This can help create a structured transition plan before 24 January 2027. Support for Foreign Manufacturers and Importers Assistance may include: India-specific regulatory mapping, Identification of applicant, Authorised Indian representative (AIR) requirements, Documentation, Testing coordination, Factory-inspection preparation, Application support. Compliance Documentation Corpseed can help organise: Product documents, Factory details, Testing records, Quality-control procedures, Brand authorisations, Technical declarations, Application forms. Regulatory Monitoring Future amendments, Quality Control Orders and implementation guidelines can change a business's obligations. Ongoing monitoring helps manufacturers and importers act before a deadline disrupts production, imports or sales. Corpseed can support the application and compliance process, but testing outcomes and licence approval remain subject to BIS requirements and the decision of the competent authority.

Subject

Summary: The Food Safety and Standards Authority of India ( FSSAI ) issued a corrigendum on 17 July 2026 to its technical specifications for high-end laboratory equipment. The FSSAI HEE specifications corrigendum 2026 changes one LC-MS/MS specification and one ICP-MS specification. For Liquid Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry (LC-MS/MS), the stated desorption temperature has changed from 500°C or better to 400°C or better. For Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICP-MS), the high-mass-side figure has changed from ≤ 1 × 10⁻⁷ to ≤ 5 × 10⁻⁷. Other terms in the notice dated 10 December, 2025 remain unchanged. According to the FSSAI, these specifications are indicative. These specifications are neither standard specifications for tendering nor procurement norms. Notification at a Glance Particular Verified details Issuing authority Food Safety and Standards Authority of India, Quality Assurance Division Document type Corrigendum File number QA-11013/1/2025-QA-FSSAI eOffice reference I/39900/2026 Date of issue 17 July 2026 Original notice date 10 December 2025 Effective date Not expressly specified Governing framework FSSAI is established under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006. The document itself contains indicative procurement specifications Equipment covered by the original notice GC-MS/MS, LC-MS/MS, ICP-MS and ICP-OES Specifications amended LC-MS/MS and ICP-MS Main stakeholders Procuring agencies, food testing laboratories, Technical Committees, manufacturers, suppliers and bidders Compliance deadline Not expressly specified Nature of requirement Indicative and non-mandatory Fees or penalties Not specified The corrigendum is mainly relevant to laboratory procurement and tender evaluation. It does not introduce any business licence, registration, certification, or regulatory filing requirements. Background of the FSSAI Equipment Specifications FSSAI issued the original notice on 10 December 2025. It contained approved technical specifications for four categories of High-End Equipment (HEE): Gas Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry (GC-MS/MS) Liquid Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICP-MS) and Inductively Coupled Plasma-Optical Emission Spectrometry (ICP-OES). These instruments support laboratory testing of food, agricultural products, water and other samples. They can help detect pesticide residues, veterinary drug residues, antibiotics, mycotoxins, contaminants and metals. The original annexures cover instrument performance, software, sample systems, accessories, power backup, gases, qualification, warranties, training, maintenance and technical bid evidence. The corrigendum does not replace those annexures. It corrects only two entries. The use of the word “approved” does not make every specification a compulsory legal standard. The corrigendum expressly states that the specifications are purely indicative. Why Was This Corrigendum Issued? The document was issued to correct two values in the original technical specifications. It does not give a separate scientific explanation for either correction. The corrected figures may help avoid the use of inaccurate conditions in future tenders, technical evaluations and compliance sheets. Any wider purpose, such as increasing supplier participation, would be a possible business effect rather than an objective expressly stated by FSSAI. What Has Changed? The corrigendum makes the following changes: Annexure II, Clause 6(vi), concerning the LC-MS/MS ionisation source, now uses a desolvation temperature of 400°C or better. Annexure III, Clause 6(ii)(b), concerning the ICP-MS mass analyser and detector, now uses a high-mass-side figure of ≤ 5 × 10⁻⁷. The ICP-MS low-mass-side figure remains ≤ 5 × 10⁻⁷. All remaining parts of the original notice continue without change. Old vs. Revised Technical Specifications Equipment and clause Earlier position Revised position Business meaning LC-MS/MS, Annexure II, Clause 6(vi) Desolvation temperature for ESI and APCI sources: 500°C or better Desolvation temperature for ESI and APCI sources: 400°C or better The stated temperature has been reduced by 100°C ICP-MS, Annexure III, Clause 6(ii)(b) High Mass Side: ≤ 1 × 10⁻⁷ High Mass Side: ≤ 5 × 10⁻⁷ The permitted numerical ceiling is higher Other provisions Original notice and four annexures No change Existing specifications continue unless a procuring agency modifies them The changes may affect whether certain equipment models fit a tender’s technical conditions. Final eligibility will still depend on the full tender and the operational needs of the procuring laboratory. Clause-Wise Explanation of the Technical Changes 1. LC-MS/MS ionisation source requirement LC-MS/MS is commonly used to measure pesticides, antibiotics, veterinary drug residues and mycotoxins. Its ionisation source converts sample molecules into charged particles before measurement. The original specification covers two ionisation methods: Electrospray Ionisation (ESI) and Atmospheric Pressure Chemical Ionisation (APCI). Desolvation uses heat to remove the solvent from charged droplets the earlier specification required a desolvation temperature of 500°C or higher for both sources. The corrected value is 400°C or better. This change may allow more LC-MS/MS models to fit the indicative condition. However, the corrigendum does not define what “or better” means. A procuring agency should assess the temperature range, source design, method performance, and sample needs together. A higher temperature should not automatically be treated as better for every instrument. Performance-based tender wording can reduce confusion. 2. ICP-MS mass analyser and detector requirement ICP-MS is used to detect metals at very low levels. The original specifications refer to testing food, seafood, water and other samples at parts-per-million, parts-per-billion and parts-per-trillion levels. Clause 6 covers the mass analyser and detector. The corrected part now reads: Mass range: 5–260 atomic mass units (amu) or better Low Mass Side: ≤ 5 × 10⁻⁷ and High Mass Side: ≤ 5 × 10⁻⁷. An atomic mass unit is used to express the mass of atoms and molecules. The source does not separately explain the unit or technical name for the low- and high-mass-side figures. The move from ≤ 1 × 10⁻⁷ to ≤ 5 × 10⁻⁷ raises the permitted maximum for the high-mass side. Numerically, this makes the single condition less strict. This is a technical inference from the revised figures, not an express conclusion stated by the FSSAI. 3. Specifications that remain unchanged No change has been made to the GC-MS/MS or ICP-OES annexures. For LC-MS/MS and ICP-MS, all conditions other than the two corrected values remain unchanged. Unchanged areas include instrument sensitivity, detection limits, software, workstations, autosamplers, gas systems, power backup, qualification, warranties, training, maintenance, accessories and performance documents. Scope and Applicability The corrigendum mainly affects stakeholders involved in selecting, supplying or evaluating high-end food testing equipment. Stakeholder Covered? Relevant effect Main responsibility Procuring agencies Yes May need to correct tender specifications Assess operational needs and finalise suitable conditions Food testing laboratories Yes May need to reassess equipment suitability Match the equipment with testing needs Technical Committees Yes May review or modify indicative values Prepare fair and technically clear specifications Equipment manufacturers and suppliers Yes May need to revise compliance statements Submit accurate, model-specific information Tender and bid teams Yes May need to update technical submissions Use corrected clauses and supporting evidence General food businesses Usually not directly No new operating duty is created Review only where involved in laboratory procurement The corrigendum does not create a general compliance duty for all food manufacturers, importers, distributors or sellers. Its direct use is connected with equipment procurement and technical evaluation. Nature of the Requirement: Indicative, Not Mandatory FSSAI clearly states that the specifications are purely indicative. They must not be treated as the standard tender specifications or mandatory procurement conditions. The source sets out the following procurement principles: Procuring agencies must independently assess their operational requirements. Agencies may modify any specification where needed. The specifications must not be read as favouring or restricting a manufacturer, technology, supplier or country of origin. Agencies may form their own Technical Committee (TEC). Subject-matter experts may be consulted before finalising tender specifications. FSSAI will not be liable for procurement or contractual issues arising from purchases made by other agencies. This distinction matters. A bidder should not be accepted or rejected only because a product matches or differs from an indicative value. The complete technical and operational position must be reviewed. Key Dates and Implementation Position Event Date Required response Original HEE specification notice 10 December 2025 Use as the base document Corrigendum 17 July 2026 Replace the two earlier values Separate effective date Not expressly specified Do not assume a retrospective date Compliance deadline Not expressly specified No statutory filing or transition deadline applies For an active tender that still contains the earlier figures, the procuring agency may need to decide whether a clarification or tender corrigendum is required. FSSAI does not prescribe a formal process for doing so. How Businesses Will Achieve Compliance? A practical roadmap for laboratories, agencies, and suppliers navigating this update: Whether the present or future purchase order of yours is based on LC-MS/MS or ICP-MS, the corrigendum will directly impact you. Revise the technical specifications documents to incorporate the updated desorption temperatures (≥400°C) and high mass-side sensitivity (≤5 × 10^-7) for LC-MS/MS and ICP-MS, respectively. Verify the compliance statement: If you have provided a compliance/non-compliance sheet based on the FSSAI specification table, ensure the values are from the corrigendum, not the 10 December 2025 version. Other specifications remain unchanged; this particular corrigendum affects only two data points. All other requirements in Annexure-II (LC-MS/MS) and Annexure-III (ICP-MS), including sensitivity, warranty, IQ/OQ/PQ, software, and accessories, remain the same as per the initial specifications. Documentation, manufacturer's certificate, hydrostatic test certificate, CCOE-Nagpur approval certificate, and purity certificate for gas cylinders will continue to be required. Consult the FSSAI website under "Advisories/Orders" and "Tenders/EOI" for the authoritative, current version of both the original notice and this corrigendum before finalising any bid. Common pitfall to be avoided: Depending on the cached or downloaded versions of the December 2025 notice, ignoring the fact that this corrigendum was issued. Given the change involved just two figures, this can be easily missed if one is not tracking the FSSAI advice. Impact on Businesses and Other Stakeholders Procuring agencies and laboratories Tender documents based on the December 2025 notice may contain outdated values. Procurement teams may need to recheck technical conditions and model evaluations. The correction may increase the number of systems that can be considered. However, laboratories must still review sensitivity, stability, sample type, workload, maintenance needs and service support. Manufacturers, suppliers and bidders Some LC-MS/MS or ICP-MS models that did not fit the earlier figures may fit the corrected position. This does not provide automatic tender eligibility. Suppliers may need to update: Clause-wise compliance statements Technical product comparisons Bid deviation notes Manufacturer literature Performance evidence and Tender clarification requests. Technical and procurement teams A review based only on the original notice may produce an incorrect result. The tender specification review should use both the original annexures and the corrigendum. No government fee is introduced. The likely cost relates to revising documents, reassessing models and repeating part of a technical evaluation. What Affected Businesses Should Do Next? The source does not create a formal compliance process. The following steps are practical tender controls based on the corrected provisions: Confirm the document version. Check whether internal files include the 17 July 2026 corrigendum. Replace both outdated values. Use 400°C or better for LC-MS/MS Clause 6(vi) and ≤ 5 × 10⁻⁷ for the ICP-MS high-mass side. Keep all other requirements unchanged. Do not treat the corrigendum as a new set of complete specifications. Review active tender documents. Identify tenders, technical sheets or evaluation reports that still use the earlier figures. Reassess equipment eligibility. Compare each model against the corrected values and the remaining adopted tender conditions. Update technical bid documents: correct compliance matrices, brochures, performance documents and deviation statements where required. Record technical decisions. Keep the reason for retaining, modifying or replacing an indicative specification. Benefits of the Corrected Specifications The corrigendum can provide several practical benefits: More accurate tender documents: Procurement teams can remove the two superseded values. Fairer technical evaluation: Suitable models are less likely to be excluded because of an incorrect figure. Wider equipment choice: The revised values may allow additional models to be considered. Improved documentation control: Laboratories may coordinate tender sheets, evaluation forms and compliance matrix. Improved clarity in supplier submissions: Bidders can submit evidence in response to the revised terms. Reduced disputes: Clear specifications will minimize unnecessary technical disputes. These benefits depend on careful tender drafting. The corrigendum does not guarantee a procurement result or commercial advantage. Practical and Technical Challenges The update is short, but implementation may still create difficulties: Old tender templates may still retain the earlier values. Active bids may require clarification or a revised technical sheet. The words “or better” may be interpreted differently by suppliers. Some evaluations may need to be repeated. Product literature may describe performance differently from the FSSAI table. Procurement teams must separate indicative guidance from mandatory tender conditions. The absence of a separate effective date may also create questions for tenders started before 17 July 2026. Procurement and Business Risks The corrigendum does not specify fines, suspension, prosecution or other statutory penalties. It is therefore incorrect to create a legal penalty section for this update. Reasonable business risks may still arise: An outdated value may wrongly exclude a suitable model. An inaccurate compliance statement may weaken a technical bid. Conflicting tender documents may lead to clarification requests or disputes. Manufacturer-specific wording may reduce fair competition. Failure to assess actual laboratory needs may result in the selection of unsuitable equipment. These are procurement and operational risks, not statutory consequences announced by FSSAI. Business Opportunities Created The corrected specifications may create opportunities in areas linked to laboratory procurement: Technical tender support for laboratories and suppliers Tender specification review and manufacturer-neutral drafting Bid compliance assessment Laboratory equipment selection support Technical document and performance-data review Technical Committee and procurement advisory services Installation qualification and performance planning Training, maintenance and application support. Equipment suppliers may also revisit opportunities where a model fits the corrected values but did not fit the earlier wording. Eligibility will still depend on the tender as a whole. Recommended Practices for Tender Compliance The following practices can help procurement and bid teams use the corrigendum correctly: Maintain one controlled copy of the original notice and corrigendum. Cite the corrected clause in tender and bid documents. Use performance-based language where possible. Define how “or better” will be assessed. Check claims against model-specific technical literature. Record the operational reason for each tender condition. Obtain expert input where specifications may restrict competition. Review all amendments before completing the technical evaluation. These are recommended controls. They are not additional legal duties created by FSSAI. Mistakes and Interpretation Risks to Avoid Stakeholders should avoid the following errors: Treating the corrigendum as a complete replacement for the original annexures Continuing to use 500°C for LC-MS/MS Clause 6(vi) Continuing to use ≤ 1 × 10⁻⁷ for the ICP-MS high-mass side Treating the indicative specifications as compulsory legal standards Assuming the issue date is also a stated effective date Applying the changes to GC-MS/MS or ICP-OES Claiming that a model automatically qualifies because it meets one corrected value and Ignoring the procuring agency’s independent technical assessment. These risks arise from the wording of the source and normal document-control concerns. FSSAI has not measured their frequency. Is the Corrigendum Necessary or an Additional Burden? The correction appears necessary because technical tenders depend on exact values. Even a small numerical error can change equipment eligibility and supplier participation. The LC-MS/MS revision may allow systems with a 400°C desolvation specification to be considered. The ICP-MS revision also relaxes the stated high-mass-side figure. Both changes may support a broader technical assessment. The short-term burden is mainly administrative. Procurement teams may have to revise tender sheets, recheck bids or issue clarifications. Suppliers may need to update technical submissions. The document takes a balanced approach by keeping the specifications indicative. Procuring agencies retain control over their final requirements. On balance, the correction is useful, provided it is applied with the original notice and not treated as a new mandatory standard. Future Outlook There are no other amendments announced by FSSAI, implementation process, or deadlines mentioned in the corrigendum. Speculation on other amendments would, thus, be baseless. Testing laboratories and equipment suppliers must monitor the advisories and tender pages for any further corrigenda or equipment specifications issued by FSSAI. The document control process within organizations must ensure that each amendment is linked back to its original notice. Key Takeaways The FSSAI HEE specifications corrigendum 2026 corrects two technical values. The LC-MS/MS desolation temperature is now 400°C or better. The ICP-MS high-mass-side figure is now ≤ 5 × 10⁻⁷. The update mainly affects laboratories, procuring agencies, Technical Committees, equipment suppliers and bidders. There is no stated compliance deadline or statutory penalty. The immediate priority is to update tender documents and technical evaluations while keeping the rest of the 10 December 2025 specifications unchanged. How Can Corpseed Help? Corpseed can assist laboratories, equipment suppliers, bidders and procurement teams with document-specific technical tender support. Relevant services include: Applicability and corrigendum assessment Tender specification review Clause-wise bid compliance assessment Technical bid consulting Compliance matrix preparation and review Product literature and performance-document review Manufacturer-neutral specification support and Procurement advisory services. Corpseed helps identify inconsistencies, missing evidence and outdated technical conditions. Final tender requirements, equipment selection and procurement decisions remain with the responsible authority. Laboratories and suppliers requiring tender compliance services or technical bid support can contact Corpseed for a focused review of the original FSSAI specifications, the corrigendum and the relevant procurement documents.

Subject

Summary: The Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) has established six new and revised Indian Standards covering textile care labels, e-waste management , stationery cutter blades, stainless-steel electropolishing, and geosynthetic products. The standards were established on 21 July 2026 through a BIS notification dated 24 July 2026, appearing in the Gazette of India dated 29 July 2026. The notification is relevant to manufacturers, importers, textile brands, e-waste recyclers , infrastructure contractors, stainless-steel processors, testing laboratories, distributors and companies supplying products to government or private-sector projects. However, businesses must understand an important distinction: The Gazette notification establishes the standards, but it does not automatically make every standard compulsory for every business. Mandatory BIS certification generally arises when a standard is referred to in legislation, incorporated into a contract or made compulsory through a separate Quality Control Order. This compliance update explains the six standards, their implementation dates, affected industries, compliance requirements, expected costs, commercial impact and the steps businesses should take before the transition period ends. Key Highlights of the BIS Notification Particular Details Issuing authority Bureau of Indian Standards Department Department of Consumer Affairs Notification date 24 July 2026 Gazette date 29 July 2026 Date of establishment 21 July 2026 Number of standards Six Revised standards IS 14452:2026 and IS 17862:2026 Newly established standards IS 19700:2026, IS 19878:2026, IS 19884:2026 and IS 19885:2026 Transition deadline 21 January 2027 for the previous textile and e-waste standards Primary industries affected Textiles, e-waste, stationery, stainless-steel processing, geosynthetics and infrastructure Mandatory status Not made universally compulsory by this notification alone Recommended action Conduct applicability and technical compliance assessments immediately Six BIS Standards at a Glance New Indian Standard Subject Nature of change Previous standard Previous standard withdrawn on IS 14452:2026 / ISO 3758:2023 Textiles Care Labelling Code Using Symbols Third revision IS 14452:2023 / ISO 3758:2012 21 January 2027 IS 17862:2026 E-Waste Management Guidelines First revision IS 17862:2022 21 January 2027 IS 19700:2026 Stationery Cutter Blades Specification New standard Not applicable Not applicable IS 19878:2026 / ISO 15730:2023 Electropolishing for smoothing and passivating stainless steel New Indian Standard aligned with ISO Not applicable Not applicable IS 19884:2026 Geosynthetic Clay Liner Specification New standard Not applicable Not applicable IS 19885:2026 Geosynthetics Drainage Geo-Composite Specification New standard Not applicable Not applicable Background of the BIS Standardisation Framework What is the Bureau of Indian Standards? The Bureau of Indian Standards is India’s national standards body. It establishes Indian Standards for products, processes, systems, and services to improve the quality, safety, reliability, and consistency. BIS is also responsible for operating conformity assessment and product certification schemes. Depending on the product and applicable regulatory order, an eligible manufacturer may be required to obtain a BIS licence or Certificate of Conformity before using the BIS Standard Mark. Indian Standards are also developed through technical committees comprising representatives from industry, government departments, laboratories, academic institutions, consumer organisations, and technical bodies. Legal basis of the notification The July 2026 notification was issued under Rule 15(1) of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, 2018. Rule 15 deals with the establishment of Indian Standards, while the subsequent provisions cover their notification, revision, review and withdrawal. Under the BIS Rules: Indian Standards, revisions, amendments and withdrawals are notified in the Official Gazette. BIS ordinarily reviews established standards periodically. Two versions of a standard may be allowed to run concurrently for a specified period. Indian Standards are generally voluntary unless made binding through a contract, legislation or specific government order. These principles are contained in the official Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, 2018. What Does “Establishment of an Indian Standard” Mean? Establishment means that BIS has formally recognised and notified a technical standard as an Indian Standard. It does not necessarily mean that every manufacturer, importer or seller must immediately obtain an ISI mark licence. A standard can become binding in three principal situations: Situation Effect on the business The standard is mentioned in a commercial or government contract The supplier must meet it to fulfil the contract The standard is referred to in legislation or regulations Compliance becomes a statutory requirement A Quality Control Order makes the standard compulsory Covered products must conform and ordinarily bear the Standard Mark under a valid BIS licence or Certificate of Conformity According to BIS’s official guidance, its certification scheme is generally voluntary. The Central Government can make conformity compulsory for specified products through Quality Control Orders (QCOs). The applicable QCO normally identifies the covered product, Indian Standard, commencement date, conformity-assessment scheme and any exemptions. Businesses should therefore examine the latest QCO position separately.  Detailed Explanation of the Six Standards 1. IS 14452:2026 / ISO 3758:2023 Textile Care Labelling Code Using Symbols IS 14452:2026 is the third revision of the Indian Standard for communicating textile-care instructions through recognised graphical symbols. It replaces IS 14452:2023, which was associated with ISO 3758:2012. The revised Indian Standard is aligned with ISO 3758:2023. What does the textile care-labelling standard cover? The standard provides a system of symbols that communicates the most severe care treatment a textile article can undergo without suffering irreversible damage. The symbols generally communicate instructions relating to: washing bleaching drying ironing professional dry cleaning and professional wet cleaning. According to the public scope of ISO 3758:2023, the system applies to most textile articles. Certain products requiring specialised cleaning such as non-removable upholstery covers, non-removable mattress covers, and carpets or rugs that require professional cleaning are excluded from its scope. Why does textile care labelling matter? A small error on a care label can create a significant commercial problem. If a label permits a treatment that damages the fabric, the business may face product returns, warranty claims, retailer deductions and loss of customer confidence. Standardised textile care symbols help: consumers understand how a product should be maintained. manufacturers communicate safe care instructions. brands reduce ambiguity across different languages. exporters align labelling practices with international markets. dry cleaners and laundries understand permitted treatments and retailers reduce complaints arising from incorrect care. Who may be affected? Affected stakeholder Likely impact Garment manufacturers Labels and product-care specifications may require revision Textile processors Finishing and care-test results may need reassessment Fashion and apparel brands Approved artwork and supplier manuals may need updating Importers Overseas care labels must be checked for Indian-market suitability Exporters ISO alignment can support consistent international labelling Label printers Symbol libraries and printing templates may require revision Retailers and e-commerce sellers Product descriptions should match the physical care label Testing laboratories Care-treatment and label-validation capabilities may need review What has changed? The Gazette confirms the following changes: the Indian Standard has moved to its third revision its international reference has changed from ISO 3758:2012 to ISO 3758:2023 the new version was established on 21 July 2026, and the previous version will be withdrawn on 21 January 2027. The Gazette does not provide a clause-by-clause comparison of new or modified symbols. Manufacturers should obtain the complete standard before changing artwork or approving new labels. Textile compliance checklist Compliance action Status to verify Obtain IS 14452:2026 Pending/Completed Compare old and new symbol sets Pending/Completed Review garment-care test results Pending/Completed Update approved label artwork Pending/Completed Verify symbol order and placement Pending/Completed Review supplier manuals Pending/Completed Check physical labels against online product information Pending/Completed Segregate old and revised inventory where necessary Pending/Completed Train merchandising and quality teams Pending/Completed Complete transition before withdrawal of the older edition Pending/Completed Businesses searching for textile care label compliance services, BIS textile certification cost, care label testing charges, or a BIS consultant for textile products should first obtain a product-specific applicability assessment. Not every garment automatically requires a separate BIS licence under this Gazette notification. 2. IS 17862:2026 E-Waste Management Guidelines IS 17862:2026 is the first revision of the Indian Standard dealing with e-waste management. The earlier standard was titled IS 17862:2022 Storage, Collection, Dismantling and Recycling of E-Waste Guidelines. The revised title is E-Waste Management Guidelines. The broader title suggests a more integrated management approach. However, the Gazette does not reproduce the revised clauses, operational requirements or technical differences. A definite comparison requires access to both editions of the standard. Who may be affected? manufacturers of electrical and electronic equipment producers and brand owners importers of covered electronic equipment e-waste collection centres refurbishers dismantlers registered recyclers Producer Responsibility Organisations logistics and reverse-logistics companies bulk consumers environmental consultants and companies managing discarded electrical and electronic equipment. Relationship with the E-Waste (Management) Rules IS 17862:2026 should not be confused with the E-Waste (Management) Rules. The BIS document is an Indian Standard that contains technical or managerial guidelines. The E-Waste (Management) Rules create statutory responsibilities for covered entities. As per the official E-Waste (Management) Rules, 2022, the designated producers, manufacturers, refurbishers and recyclers should register themselves on the concerned portal. The producers are also responsible for fulfilling the Extended Producer Responsibility requirements and making the required returns. Therefore, adopting IS 17862:2026 does not, by itself, replace: EPR registration recycler or refurbisher registration Central or State Pollution Control Board requirements statutory returns EPR certificate obligations environmental authorisations hazardous-waste controls or other approvals applicable to the facility. Operational areas that should be reviewed The complete standard should be examined to determine the actual requirements. From a compliance-planning perspective, businesses should be prepared to review: Operational area Questions to examine Collection Are collection channels documented and controlled? Receipt of e-waste Are incoming materials identified, weighed and recorded? Receipt of e-waste Are different categories safely stored and segregated? Handling Are breakage, leakage and unsafe exposure prevented? Dismantling Are procedures, tools and worker protections adequate? Recycling Are material recovery and disposal routes documented? Hazardous components Are batteries, mercury-containing parts and other hazardous fractions appropriately controlled? Worker safety Are PPE, training and emergency procedures maintained? Traceability Can material movement be followed from receipt to final output? Documentation Are registers, invoices, returns and certificates retained? Emergency response Are fire, spill and exposure procedures established? Downstream vendors Are waste recipients appropriately verified? Transition period IS 17862:2022 and IS 17862:2026 may run concurrently until the older standard is withdrawn on 21 January 2027. Organisations implementing the 2022 version must not wait for the withdrawal date they must adopt the new standard, review for any changes, and ensure that all the organisation’s procedures and documentation are updated. Commercial compliance keywords Businesses commonly search for: e-waste registration cost in India EPR registration consultant e-waste recycler registration fees e-waste compliance services CPCB EPR registration support e-waste authorisation consultant and e-waste management compliance cost. These costs cannot be calculated from the BIS notification alone. The final expense depends on the type of entity, product categories, quantity of e-waste, facility infrastructure, testing requirements, and existing environmental approvals. 3. IS 19700:2026 Stationery Cutter Blades Specification IS 19700:2026 is a newly established product specification for stationery cutter blades. No earlier Indian Standard is also identified for concurrent operation or withdrawal. The development is relevant because cutter blades are widely used in offices, schools, packaging operations, workshops, warehouses and commercial establishments. Product inconsistency may cause blade breakage, poor cutting performance, or injury. Businesses potentially affected cutter-blade manufacturers utility-knife and stationery brands contract manufacturers importers distributors and wholesalers retailers e-commerce sellers institutional stationery suppliers packaging-industry suppliers and testing laboratories. What should businesses examine? The Gazette provides the title of the standard but does not reproduce its technical clauses. Manufacturers and importers should obtain IS 19700:2026 and check whether it prescribes requirements relating to: blade material dimensions and tolerances hardness or mechanical performance cutting performance corrosion resistance break-off segments surface finish dimensional consistency marking safety information packaging sampling and test methods. These are compliance-review areas, not a substitute for the actual standard. Recommended cutter-blade compliance plan Step Action 1 Confirm whether the product falls within the scope of IS 19700:2026 2 Obtain the complete standard 3 Map product models, sizes, and blade types 4 Compare drawings and specifications with the standard 5 Review steel or other raw-material certificates 6 Identify applicable product tests 7 Test representative models or batches 8 Review retail and bulk packaging 9 Check marking and user-safety information 10 Determine whether any QCO, tender, or buyer makes conformity mandatory Companies evaluating BIS certification for cutter blades, testing costs for cutter blades, BIS licence fees for stationery products, or a product certification consultant in India should request a scope review before incurring testing costs. 4. IS 19878:2026/ISO 15730:2023 Electropolishing of Stainless Steel IS 19878:2026 adopts ISO 15730:2023 for electropolishing, a process used to smooth and passivate stainless steel. Electropolishing is an electrochemical surface-finishing process. It removes a controlled amount of material from the surface, helping reduce microscopic irregularities and improving surface characteristics. According to the public abstract of ISO 15730:2023, the standard specifies: information that the purchaser should provide to the finisher requirements for electropolishing and associated test methods. Its stated scope includes specified stainless-steel alloy series and precipitation-hardened alloys. Industries potentially affected Industry Possible relevance Pharmaceutical equipment Smooth and cleanable stainless-steel surfaces Food-processing equipment Surface hygiene and cleanability Medical and laboratory equipment Controlled surface finishing Chemical processing Corrosion-related surface performance Precision engineering Surface uniformity Aerospace supply chains Controlled finishing and customer specifications Stainless-steel fabrication Process and acceptance requirements Electropolishing service providers Purchaser information, process control and testing Compliance areas for purchasers and finishers Businesses should review: stainless-steel grade and material identification purchaser drawings and specifications surfaces requiring treatment areas excluded from treatment required surface condition pre-treatment and cleaning electropolishing process controls post-treatment cleaning inspection and acceptance criteria required testing handling after processing traceability and certificate or test-report requirements. Commercial benefits Conformity with a recognised electropolishing standard can help businesses: communicate precise requirements to service providers reduce disputes between purchaser and finisher achieve more consistent surface quality improve acceptance in regulated supply chains strengthen technical bids meet customer-specific quality requirements and support export-oriented manufacturing. Businesses could also require quotations for electropolishing testing fees, stainless steel compliance consultancy, ISO 15730 testing, surface finish testing charges, or BIS implementation services. The exact fee will be determined by the metal grade, part geometry, batch quantity, tests to be performed, and acceptance standards. 5. IS 19884:2026 Geosynthetic Clay Liner Specification IS 19884:2026 is a new Indian Standard for geosynthetic clay liners, commonly referred to as GCLs. A geosynthetic clay liner is generally used as a low-permeability barrier in environmental and civil-engineering applications. It commonly combines a clay component, such as bentonite, with geotextile or related geosynthetic layers. Typical applications municipal solid-waste landfills industrial-waste containment mining and tailings facilities ponds and reservoirs canal lining secondary containment environmental remediation wastewater facilities and other seepage-control projects. Stakeholders potentially affected GCL manufacturers geosynthetic importers infrastructure contractors engineering consultants landfill developers mining companies environmental consultants project-management consultants testing laboratories government departments and project owners procuring lining systems. Areas requiring technical verification Since the Gazette does not contain the technical specification, affected businesses must consult IS 19884:2026 to confirm applicable requirements. The compliance review may need to cover: Review area Business relevance Product composition Confirm the materials and construction used Dimensions and tolerances Supports correct supply and installation Mass or material content Helps assess manufacturing consistency Hydraulic performance Relevant to containment and seepage control Mechanical performance Important during handling and installation Internal bonding Helps maintain composite integrity Durability Relevant to expected service conditions Sampling and testing Supports batch acceptance Product identification Enables traceability Packaging and storage Reduces transport and site damage These parameters must be confirmed from the complete standard and project specification before testing. Business implications A national specification can help standardise procurement language and reduce uncertainty between manufacturers, contractors and project consultants. It may also increase demand for: geosynthetic material testing third-party inspection factory-quality systems product documentation installation supervision environmental engineering services and compliant GCL manufacturing in India. Companies assessing geosynthetic clay liner (GCL) testing costs, GCL compliance certification, BIS consultant for construction materials, or geosynthetic testing laboratory charges should identify the required tests and sampling frequency before requesting a quotation. 6. IS 19885:2026 Drainage Geo-Composite Specification IS 19885:2026 establishes an Indian Standard for drainage geo-composites. A drainage geo-composite generally combines a drainage core with one or more geotextile, filter, or protective layers. These products are used to collect and transport liquids or gases in civil engineering and environmental systems. Common applications road and highway drainage retaining walls tunnels landfill leachate or gas systems building foundations podiums and green roofs bridge structures railway projects underground structures and subsurface drainage systems. Stakeholders potentially affected drainage geo-composite manufacturers geosynthetic suppliers and importers infrastructure developers road and railway contractors landfill operators civil-engineering consultants architects and project consultants testing laboratories and government procurement agencies. Potential compliance-review areas The complete standard should be consulted for exact clauses and acceptance limits. A technical gap assessment may need to examine: product construction drainage-core configuration dimensions and tolerances mass per unit area in-plane flow performance performance under compressive load tensile or mechanical properties filter compatibility clogging behaviour durability product identification sampling packaging and installation-related information. Why the standard matters? Drainage failure can contribute to water accumulation, excessive pressure, leakage, erosion and premature structural deterioration. A uniform product specification can improve material selection, supplier comparison and quality control. IS 19885:2026 may therefore influence: tender specifications consultant approvals material-submittal requirements pre-dispatch inspection third-party testing site acceptance and long-term infrastructure performance. What Has Changed Under the 2026 BIS Notification? Area Earlier position New position Business action Textile care labelling IS 14452:2023 / ISO 3758:2012 IS 14452:2026 / ISO 3758:2023 Review symbols, labels, testing and artwork E-waste management IS 17862:2022 IS 17862:2026 Compare operational and management requirements Cutter blades No previous standard listed IS 19700:2026 established Assess products against the new specification Stainless-steel electropolishing No previous Indian Standard listed IS 19878:2026 / ISO 15730:2023 established Review purchaser-finisher specifications and tests Geosynthetic clay liners No previous standard listed IS 19884:2026 established Review manufacturing, testing and procurement criteria Drainage geo-composites No previous standard listed IS 19885:2026 established Review product performance and tender requirements Implementation Timeline and Transition Norms Date or period Compliance significance 21 July 2026 All six standards were established 24 July 2026 BIS issued the notification 29 July 2026 Date shown on the Gazette publication July 2026 to January 2027 Concurrent-running period for the old and new textile and e-waste standards 21 January 2027 IS 14452:2023 and IS 17862:2022 are scheduled for withdrawal Recommended transition plan Recommended period Action August–September 2026 Obtain standards, identify applicable products and check mandatory status September–October 2026 Conduct a clause-by-clause gap analysis October–November 2026 Modify products, processes, labels and supplier specifications November–December 2026 Complete testing, documentation and employee training December 2026–January 2027 Close non-conformities and complete the transition After 21 January 2027 Avoid relying on the withdrawn textile and e-waste editions where the current standard is required Why Were These Standards Introduced or Revised? The notification does not include a detailed statement explaining the policy reasons for every standard. However, their subject matter reflects several practical objectives for standardisation. Improving consumer information The textile-care standard creates a common language for communicating safe care treatments to consumers. Promoting environmentally sound e-waste management The revised e-waste guideline can support more consistent handling, collection, storage, dismantling and recycling practices. Improving product safety and consistency The cutter-blade specification provides a reference point for evaluating a common consumer and industrial product. Aligning Indian practices with international standards The adoption of ISO 3758:2023 and ISO 15730:2023 can reduce differences between Indian and international technical expectations. Supporting infrastructure quality The two geosynthetic standards can improve material specification, procurement and testing for drainage and containment projects. Reducing buyer-supplier disputes A published standard creates a common reference for technical requirements, product inspection, testing and acceptance. Impact on Businesses Impact on manufacturers Manufacturers may need to: review product design and specifications update quality-control plans introduce additional testing revise raw-material controls modify labels or packaging train production and inspection teams update supplier agreements and maintain stronger traceability records. Impact on importers Importers should verify that overseas suppliers understand the relevant Indian Standard. A foreign test report may not automatically satisfy a BIS certification scheme or a contract requiring testing by a specific laboratory. Importers may need to obtain: product drawings material certificates test reports label samples batch records manufacturer declarations and factory information. If a QCO applies, the foreign manufacturer, not merely the Indian importer, may need the relevant BIS approval under the applicable certification scheme. Impact on MSMEs MSMEs may experience pressure from: standard-purchase costs testing charges consultancy expenses process upgrades additional documentation limited access to specialised laboratories and short customer-imposed implementation timelines. At the same time, early compliance can help an MSME qualify for larger tenders, organised retail networks, OEM supply chains and export opportunities. Impact on testing laboratories Laboratories may see new demand for product, material and performance testing. Before offering a test, the laboratory should confirm: whether the test falls within its accredited scope whether the standard requires specific equipment whether sampling must be performed independently whether BIS recognition is necessary and whether the test report will be accepted for the intended certification or tender. Impact on retailers and distributors Retailers and distributors may not manufacture the products, but they can still face commercial risks when labels, safety information or supplier claims are incorrect. They should review: supplier declarations licence details where applicable test reports physical markings packaging online product descriptions and records supporting conformity claims. How Can Businesses Achieve Compliance? Step 1: Identify the applicable standard Map every product, process and business activity against the titles and scopes of the six standards. Do not assume that a similar product is automatically covered. Step 2: Obtain the official standard Purchase or access the current Indian Standard through an authorised BIS source. The Gazette notification alone is insufficient for a technical assessment. Step 3: Check whether conformity is mandatory Search for an applicable Quality Control Order, sectoral regulation, tender condition or customer contract. Step 4: Conduct a technical gap analysis Compare current specifications, processes, tests, labels and records with each applicable clause. Step 5: Prepare a compliance action plan Assign responsibility, budget and deadlines for every identified gap. Step 6: Update supplier controls Communicate new material, testing and documentation requirements to approved suppliers. Step 7: Arrange testing Identify suitable laboratories, representative samples, test charges and turnaround times. Step 8: Update labels and packaging This is particularly important for textile products and any product-marking requirement contained in the new standards. Step 9: Apply for BIS certification where required If a QCO or contract requires BIS certification, prepare the licence application under the correct conformity-assessment scheme. Step 10: Train employees The quality, production, purchasing, design, warehouse, and regulatory teams should understand the revised requirements. Step 11: Conduct an internal audit Verify implementation before a BIS inspection, a customer audit, or a tender submission. Step 12: Monitor regulatory developments Standards, QCOs, product manuals and implementation guidelines can change. Compliance monitoring should continue after the initial transition. Documents Businesses Should Keep Ready Document category Examples Corporate records Incorporation certificate, factory details and authorised-signatory documents Product records Drawings, technical specifications and model lists Raw-material records Purchase specifications and supplier certificates Process records Process flowchart, work instructions and control plans Testing records Internal and independent laboratory reports Equipment records Calibration and maintenance certificates Quality records Inspection plans, non-conformity reports and corrective actions Labelling records Approved artwork, packaging and marking samples Supplier records Approved vendor list and supplier declarations Training records Employee training attendance and competency records Environmental records EPR, recycler, refurbisher and pollution-control documents, where applicable Certification records BIS application, correspondence, inspection reports and licence details BIS Certification Cost and Compliance Expenses There is no single fixed BIS certification cost in India for all six standards. The notification does not prescribe a common fee, and four of the documents are not identified as compulsory certification standards in the notification itself. Major cost components Cost component What determines the amount? Purchase of the standard Number and format of standards required Applicability assessment Product range and complexity Gap-analysis fees Number of models, sites and processes Product testing charges Test methods, samples and laboratory rates Factory upgrades Existing production and quality infrastructure Testing equipment Whether in-house testing is required Label modification Number of SKUs and inventory volume BIS application fees Applicable certification scheme Inspection expenses Factory location and scheme requirements Marking fees Product and licence-specific conditions Consultant charges Scope of documentation and implementation support Surveillance and renewal Continued certification obligations Environmental compliance cost Facility category, EPR obligations and approvals Businesses seeking BIS registration fees, ISI mark licence costs, BIS product testing charges, BIS consultant fees, or BIS certification services in India should obtain a customised quotation after confirming their eligibility. Quoting a flat amount before identifying the product, standard, certification scheme, manufacturing location, and testing requirements can be misleading. Benefits for Businesses Benefit Practical value Consistent product quality Reduces batch variation and customer complaints Better consumer confidence Demonstrates attention to recognised requirements Stronger tender eligibility Supports government and institutional procurement Improved export readiness International alignment can reduce technical differences Better supplier control Creates measurable purchase specifications Lower failure risk Testing and process control help detect defects earlier Improved traceability Stronger records support investigations and audits Reduced contractual disputes Buyer and supplier can refer to the same requirements Market differentiation Early adopters can position themselves as quality-focused Long-term cost control Preventive compliance can reduce rejection and recall expenses Is This the Right Decision or an Additional Burden? The notification can create both long-term benefits and short-term compliance pressure. Positive impact Possible burden Improved product consistency Additional testing costs Better consumer information Label and packaging changes Safer and more reliable products Process modifications Stronger environmental practices Documentation workload International harmonisation Need for technical expertise Better infrastructure procurement More detailed material approval Export and tender opportunities Certification and inspection expenses Reduced substandard competition Pressure on smaller manufacturers Business Opportunities Created by the New Standards Opportunity Potential customers Textile care-label design and printing Apparel manufacturers and brands Textile testing Garment exporters and retailers E-waste collection and reverse logistics Producers and bulk consumers EPR compliance services Electronics producers and importers E-waste recycling infrastructure Registered recyclers and investors Cutter-blade product testing Manufacturers and importers Electropolishing services Pharmaceutical, food and engineering companies Surface-quality testing Stainless-steel processors GCL manufacturing and supply Landfills, mining and infrastructure projects Drainage geo-composite manufacturing Roads, tunnels and construction projects Geosynthetic testing laboratories Manufacturers, contractors and consultants BIS compliance consulting Manufacturers, foreign producers and importers Technical training Quality, production and regulatory teams Third-party inspection Project owners and procurement agencies The standards can also encourage domestic manufacturing by giving buyers a clearer technical benchmark for comparing Indian and imported products. Common Compliance Mistakes to Avoid Assuming that every newly published BIS standard is automatically mandatory. Treating 21 January 2027 as a universal certification deadline. Relying only on the four-page Gazette notification. Using the previous textile or e-waste edition after its withdrawal where the current edition is required. Sending samples for testing before confirming the exact scope. Accepting an overseas test report without checking whether it is recognised. Confusing a laboratory report with a BIS licence. Using the ISI mark without authorisation. Ignoring customer contracts and tender requirements. Failing to update e-commerce descriptions after changing a physical label. Treating IS 17862 compliance as a replacement for EPR or pollution-control compliance. Waiting until the end of the transition period to begin implementation. How Corpseed Can Help? Managing a new BIS standard can become complicated when a business does not know whether the standard applies, whether certification is compulsory, or which tests and documents are required. Corpseed can support manufacturers, importers, recyclers, infrastructure businesses and product suppliers through a structured compliance process. Applicability and mandatory-status assessment Corpseed can help assess: whether the product falls within the scope of the standard whether an applicable QCO exists whether a BIS licence is required whether a tender or contract makes conformity binding and which business entity should apply. BIS certification and ISI mark licence support Where certification is required, support may include: BIS licence application assistance document preparation product and model classification testing coordination factory-inspection readiness response to technical queries corrective-action support licence-renewal assistance and post-certification compliance. Technical gap analysis Corpseed can coordinate a comparison between current practices and the relevant standard, covering: product specifications raw materials manufacturing processes inspection plans test facilities labels and packaging traceability and quality records. E-waste and EPR compliance support For eligible electrical and electronic equipment businesses, support may include: EPR applicability assessment producer registration recycler and refurbisher compliance guidance documentation return-filing support recordkeeping systems and coordination of related environmental approvals. Product testing coordination Corpseed can help businesses identify suitable laboratories, required samples, documentation and expected testing timelines. Label and packaging review For textile and other covered products, label artwork, product descriptions, markings and packaging can be reviewed against the applicable standard and certification conditions. Compliance-cost planning A customised estimate can be prepared for: BIS certification fees BIS consultant charges product testing charges factory-preparation expenses label modifications quality-system improvements and renewal or surveillance requirements. Need help determining whether any of the six BIS standards apply to your business? Connect with Corpseed for a product-specific compliance assessment, BIS certification cost estimate, and step-by-step implementation support.

Subject

Summary: The Bureau of Indian Standards ( BIS ), on 23 July 2026, has come out with an updated notification through the BIS Rules, 2018, and adopted a total of 19 Indian Standards (IS) relating to various sectors such as leather safety footwear, combine harvesters, cement, wine analysis, irrigation pipes, and AYUSH pharmacovigilance, among others. The BIS notification 2026 has been made in the Gazette of India, Part III, Section 4, which will be effective from 21 July 2026. If your business manufactures, imports, tests, or sells products covered under any of these 19 standards, this update directly affects your compliance obligations. Many of these standards replace older specifications that are decades old, some dating back to 1970, 1979, 1982, 1983, 1985, and 1986, and businesses now have a fixed transition window before the old versions are formally withdrawn. This oversight could lead to products that do not meet the new requirements, shipment rejections, failure in BIS inspections, or even loss of certification. In this guide, we highlight every change in plain terms, clarify whom the changes affect, and list the precise actions your company must take to ensure compliance. If the process seems too complicated, professional regulatory assistance is available to help you navigate it. Key Highlights BIS issued Notification dated 23 July 2026. The notification was published under Rule 15(1) of the BIS Rules, 2018. 19 Indian Standards have been newly established or revised. All 19 standards came into effect on 21 July 2026. 16 of the 19 standards replace existing older Indian Standards. The older/superseded standards remain valid concurrently until they are formally withdrawn. The withdrawal date for most superseded standards is 21 January 2027, with a 6-month transition period. 3 standards (IS 19535, IS 19655 Part 6, and IS 19792) are entirely new, with no standard being withdrawn. One revision (IS 7328:2026) withdraws two older standards simultaneously: IS 7328:2020 and IS 10146:1982. Sectors affected include leather & footwear, glass, food additives, cement, laboratory instruments, plastics, wine testing, agricultural machinery, flour milling, telecom/radar towers, geotechnical engineering, irrigation equipment, paper, and AYUSH pharmacovigilance. Businesses using the withdrawn standards must transition their product specifications, testing protocols, and certification documentation before 21 January 2027. The Regulatory Framework The Bureau of Indian Standards is the organization responsible for setting National Standards of India in accordance with the provisions of the Bureau of Indian Standards Act, 2016. BIS is responsible for formulating, revising, and withdrawing Indian Standards on the quality, safety, and performance of products sold in the country. This notification is made under Sub-rule (1) of Rule 15 of BIS Rules, 2018, wherein BIS has been authorized to notify the creation of new or modified standards, as well as the date of withdrawal of old standards. Scope of this notification: The 19 standards span multiple technical divisions of BIS, so the update is not limited to a single industry. It covers consumer safety products (safety boots, safety glasses), food and pharma-adjacent items (food-grade cellulose, wine testing, pharmacovigilance), construction materials (cement, ground improvement, radar tower foundations), agricultural equipment (combine harvesters, flour milling, sprinkler irrigation), and general specifications (hydrometers, plastics, paper). What Has Changed Below is a structured comparison of every standard established under this notification against the standard it replaces (where applicable). S. No. New Standard (Effective 21 July 2026) Old Standard (Withdrawn 21 Jan 2027) 1 IS 1989 (Part 1):2026- Leather Safety Boots & Shoes, Part 1 for Miners (5th Revision) IS 1989 (Part 1)-1986 (4th Revision) 2 IS 1989 (Part 2):2026- Leather Safety Boots & Shoes, Part 2 for Heavy Metal Industries (5th Revision) IS 1989 (Part 2):1986 (4th Revision) 3 IS 2553 (Part 3):2026- Safety Glass, Part 3 Solar Applications (1st Revision) IS 2553 (Part 3):2019 4 IS 5306:2026- Sodium Carboxymethyl Cellulose, Food Grade (3rd Revision) IS 5306:1996 (2nd Revision) 5 IS 5867:2026- Leather Board for Footwear Insole (1st Revision) IS 5867-1970 6 IS 6452:2026- High Alumina Cement for Structural Use (2nd Revision) IS 6452:1989 (1st Revision) 7 IS 7324:2026- Brix Hydrometers (2nd Revision) IS 7324-1983 (1st Revision) 8 IS 7328:2026- Polyethylene (PE) Material for Moulding & Extrusion (3rd Revision) IS 7328:2020 (2nd Revision) and IS 10146-1982 9 IS 7585:2026- Wines, Methods of Test (2nd Revision) IS 7585:1995 (1st Revision) 10 IS 8122 (Part 1):2026- Combine Harvester, Terminology (2nd Revision) IS 8122 (Part 1):1994 (1st Revision) 11 IS 8122 (Part 2):2026- Combine Harvester, Test Code (2nd Revision) IS 8122 (Part 2):2000 (1st Revision) 12 IS 9374:2026- Flour Milling Industry, Glossary (1st Revision) IS 9374-1979 13 IS 11233:2026- Foundations for Radar/Satellite Antennas, Microwave & TV Towers (1st Revision) IS 11233-1985 14 IS 15284 (Part 1):2026- Ground Improvement, Stone Columns (1st Revision) IS 15284 (Part 1):2003 15 IS 15284 (Part 2):2026- Ground Improvement, Preconsolidation Using Vertical Drains (1st Revision) IS 15284 (Part 2):2004 16 IS 17425:2026- Quick Coupled PE Pipes & Fittings for Sprinkler Irrigation (1st Revision) IS 17425:2020 17 IS 19535:2026 (ISO 3036:2025)- Board, Puncture Resistance Using Pendulum Device NA (new standard) 18 IS 19655 (Part 6):2026- Handmade Paper, Part 6 for Certificates NA (new standard) 19 IS 19792:2026- Pharmacovigilance Centre for ASU&H Systems, Service Requirements NA (new standard) In simple words: Most of these are updated versions (revisions) of standards businesses were already following; some have been in use for over 40 years. The government has now modernised them. Three standards are entirely new and did not exist before. Implementation Timeline / Norms Understanding the timeline is the most critical part of this notification for compliance purposes. 21 July 2026:  Effective date of establishment for all 19 new/revised Indian Standards. 21 July 2026 to 21 January 2027:  Transition period. During this window, both the new standard and the corresponding old standard are simultaneously valid for the 16 revised specifications. 21 January 2027:  Withdrawal date. From this date, the older standards listed in column 4 of the schedule cease to have legal recognition, and only the new 2026 versions will apply. IS 19535:2026, IS 19655 (Part 6): 2026, and IS 19792:2026 have no transition requirements, as they are new standards with no withdrawn standards. Practical implications for businesses: They have a 6-month timeframe to change their product testing procedures, update their quality manuals, train quality control personnel, and, where necessary, obtain new BIS Licences/Certification Marks under the new standard numbers. Why Was This Implemented? BIS periodically reviews and revises Indian Standards to keep them aligned with current technology, international practice, and market needs. Based on the contents of this notification, the objectives include: Technical modernisation: several standards being replaced were 30-55 years old (e.g., IS 5867 from 1970, IS 9374 from 1979, IS 10146 from 1982) and needed updates to reflect current materials and manufacturing methods. International harmonisation: IS 19535:2026 is directly aligned with ISO 3036:2025, showing BIS's continued effort to align Indian Standards with global ISO benchmarks. Worker and consumer safety: the revised leather safety boot standards (IS 1989 Parts 1 & 2) protect workers in the mining and heavy metal industries, reflecting ongoing occupational safety priorities. New sectoral coverage: the introduction of a dedicated pharmacovigilance service standard (IS 19792) for Ayurveda, Siddha, Sowa-Rigpa, Unani, and Homoeopathy (ASU&H) systems reflects the growing regulatory focus on traditional medicine safety monitoring. Documentation standardisation: a new standard for handmade paper used specifically for certificates (IS 19655 Part 6) supports consistent quality in official/ceremonial paper products. Impact on Businesses Manufacturers: Any manufacturer producing leather safety footwear, high alumina cement, PE pipes/materials, combine harvesters, or safety glass must update their manufacturing and testing processes to conform to the 2026 specifications before the old standards are withdrawn. Importers: Companies importing the polyethylene materials, safety glass used in solar technology, or laboratory equipment such as Brix hydrometers must ensure that the IS numbers listed in the supplier's certification and documentation were updated before 2027. Exporter: Exporters using BIS certification as a quality measure should take steps now to update the cited standards to avoid any dispute regarding their validity. Brand Owners & BIS Licence Holders: Companies holding a BIS Licence (under the Scheme of Testing and Inspection) for any of the 16 revised standards will likely need to apply for licence amendment to reflect the new IS number and revised technical parameters. MSMEs & Startups: Smaller manufacturers of items such as leather board insoles, agricultural equipment components, or irrigation pipes and fittings often have limited in-house regulatory teams this makes early action and expert guidance particularly valuable to avoid last-minute compliance gaps. Testing Laboratories: Laboratories conducting tests related to wine analysis, hydrometers, and plastics will require new testing methods that comply with the revised standards. Construction and Infrastructural Organizations: Organizations engaged in foundation design for radar/telecommunication towers and in ground improvement activities, such as stone column and vertical drain construction, will require the use of the new code of practice standards IS 11233:2026 and IS 15284 Parts 1 and 2. Manufacturers of Agricultural Machinery: Manufacturers of combine harvesters will require changes in terminology and testing codes that conform to the standard IS 8122 (Parts 1 and 2):2026. AYUSH Sector Enterprises: Pharmacovigilance centres within the Ayurveda, Siddha, Sowa-Rigpa, Unani, and Homoeopathy systems will require a new service requirement standard (IS 19792:2026). How Businesses Will Achieve Compliance? A practical, step-by-step roadmap: Identify applicability:  Check whether your product, material, or service falls under any of the 19 standards listed above. Review the new standard document:  Obtain the full text of the relevant 2026 IS standard from BIS to understand the exact technical changes from the previous version. Gap analysis:  Compare your current product specifications, manufacturing process, and test reports against the new requirements to identify gaps. Update internal documentation:  Revise quality manuals, standard operating procedures (SOPs), and product datasheets to reference the correct 2026 standard number. Amend BIS licence/certification:  If you hold a BIS Licence or Certification Mark linked to an old standard, apply for an amendment or renewal referencing the new IS number before 21 January 2027. Retest products:  Where technical parameters have changed, get products re-tested in a BIS-recognised or NABL-accredited laboratory against the new standard. Train quality control staff:  Ensure QC and production teams understand the revised parameters, especially for safety-critical items like footwear and safety glasses. Update supplier and vendor contracts:  For importers and traders, ensure supplier agreements specify compliance with the 2026 standard. Maintain records:  Keep documentary evidence of the transition (old and new test reports, correspondence with BIS) for at least the transition period plus a reasonable buffer. Track the withdrawal date:  Mark 21 January 2027 as a hard compliance deadline for phasing out reliance on the older standard. Common mistakes to avoid: Continuing to reference the old IS number on product labels or certificates after the withdrawal date. Assuming the six-month transition period means no action is needed until the deadline. Overlooking licence amendment requirements when only the standard number (not the product itself) has changed. Not verifying whether a standard was withdrawn by a single replacement or, as in the case of IS 7328:2026, by two separate older standards. Benefits for Businesses Legal compliance and avoidance of penalties or product seizure for non-conforming goods. Reduced risk of shipment rejection for exporters relying on updated BIS-marked products. Improved consumer and buyer trust through demonstrably current, internationally aligned standards. Smoother government tender participation, since public procurement frequently mandates current BIS standards. Operational efficiency from updated, more relevant technical specifications. Competitive advantage for early adopters who transition ahead of the January 2027 deadline. Right Decision or Additional Burden? For most businesses, this change is just a periodic, mandatory regulatory update rather than a disruptive one. A six-month window of concurrent validity is a practical and business-friendly process for making such changes; it does away with the problems caused by the unexpected withdrawal of standards. However, companies should be mindful of the administrative costs of updating documents, testing products, and renewing BIS licenses, as these processes take time. There are delays in obtaining a BIS license , and companies running up against the January 2027 deadline may fall into the trap of a compliance issue. Overall, it would be wiser to treat this as a chance for system improvement. Business Opportunities Created Testing and certification demand:  laboratories and certification bodies may see increased business as manufacturers seek re-testing against the new standards. Consulting and compliance services:  businesses without in-house regulatory expertise create demand for compliance consultancies to manage licence amendments and documentation. Export market access: updated, internationally aligned standards (such as IS 19535 aligned with ISO 3036:2025) can strengthen the credibility of Indian products in global markets. New AYUSH sector formalisation: the pharmacovigilance service standard opens opportunities for ASU&H healthcare entities to formally structure and certify their safety monitoring operations. Quality upgrade cycles: manufacturers upgrading equipment/processes to meet new standards may also modernise broader production capabilities. Why Choose Corpseed? Navigating a multi-sector BIS notification like this one with different deadlines, licence amendment requirements, and technical parameters across 19 separate standards can be time-consuming for internal teams. Corpseed supports businesses through the entire compliance lifecycle, including: BIS Licence and Certification Mark application and amendment Gap analysis between old and new Indian Standards Coordination with BIS-recognised testing laboratories End-to-end documentation preparation and filing. Liaison with BIS regional and head offices Renewal and periodic compliance tracking Pan-India support for manufacturers, importers, and exporters across all sectors covered under this notification Our team works directly with businesses to convert a complex regulatory notification into a simple, actionable transition plan so you can focus on production and growth. At the same time, compliance is handled correctly and on time. Corpseed's Core Message Changes such as those in the BIS notice can easily go unnoticed until there is cargo detention, non-conformity during inspections, or denial of license renewal due to citing an obsolete standard. It will be better to act now rather than wait until 21 January 2027, when the standard expires. If your business manufactures, imports, tests, or certifies any product covered under these 19 revised Indian Standards, now is the right time to review your compliance position. Corpseed's regulatory experts can assess your exposure, manage your BIS licence amendments, and guide you through a smooth transition to the new standards. Get in touch with our team today. Conclusion The current BIS notification, published on 23rd July 2026, sets 19 new or amended Indian Standards for different sectors, which will be applicable as of 21st July 2026. It also provides a clear transition period until 21st January 2027 for 16 Indian standards that will be replaced. Companies engaged in the production of leather products, safety glass, cement, plastics, agricultural machinery, irrigation, construction, and AYUSH should assess their product specifications and testing criteria, as well as their BIS licences, before the deadline. Doing this in advance will save you from compliance risks, licence rejections, and shipment delays. If you need any help understanding the applicability of the notification and amending your BIS licence, our team of professionals at Corpseed will provide you with complete assistance.

Subject

Summary: On 11th June 2026, the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare banned the manufacture, sale, and distribution of 16 fixed-dose combination (FDC) drugs across India. This fixed dose combination drug ban 2026 was issued through 16 separate notifications under Section 26A of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, and published in the Gazette of India on 15th June 2026. If your business produces, markets, imports, or distributes any medicine in India, then this news update affects you. A prohibition order is not issued regularly. This means that the production, sale, and distribution of such combinations after the date of issuance of the notice becomes illegal. This article aims to provide simple information about the changes, the government's rationale for the decision, the combination involved, and the actions to be taken by pharma manufacturers, formulators, distributors, and retailers. The guidance becomes more complex when reformulation, stock reduction, or other regulatory issues are involved; therefore, it is necessary to consult a professional at Corpseed in such cases. Key Highlights The Central Government has prohibited the manufacture, sale, and distribution of 16 fixed-dose combination (FDC) drugs for human use, with immediate effect. The ban was issued through notifications S.O. 3068(E) to S.O. 3083(E), dated 11th June 2026, published in the Gazette of India on 15th June 2026. The legal basis is Section 26A of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (23 of 1940), which empowers the Central Government to prohibit a drug when it is satisfied that its use poses a risk to human beings and safer alternatives exist. The banned list includes well-known combinations involving Amoxicillin, Cefadroxyl, Cefuroxime, Dicyclomine, Paracetamol, Gliclazide, as well as several Aloe Vera- and herbal-based fixed-dose combinations. Every combination was first flagged by an Expert Committee in 2021, which found them "irrational" for lacking supporting scientific and peer-reviewed evidence. The Drugs Technical Advisory Board (DTAB) examined the Expert Committee's findings and, in principle, agreed with the recommendation. A Sub-Committee of DTAB was formed to examine each combination in detail and allowed manufacturers and stakeholders to submit data through public notices. The Sub-Committee submitted its final report on 28th December 2024, recommending prohibition in the larger public interest. The order takes effect immediately from the date of notification there is no transition or sell-through period mentioned in the notifications. Businesses currently manufacturing, marketing, or holding stock of any of these 16 combinations must cease operations related to these combinations and review their regulatory position without delay. The Regulatory Framework Applicable Law These notifications are made under Section 26A of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. Section 26A grants the Central Government the authority to prohibit the manufacture, sale, or distribution of any drug if it believes the drug is likely to be hazardous to humans, there are safer alternatives available, or it is not therapeutic. What Is a "Fixed Dose Combination" (FDC)? A fixed-dose combination is a single pharmaceutical product that contains two or more active ingredients in a fixed dose ratio. FDCs are common because they can improve patient compliance (fewer pills to take). Still, if the ingredients lack sound scientific justification for combination, they can pose unnecessary risks without added therapeutic benefit. This is precisely the concern raised across all 16 notifications. Scope These prohibitions apply nationwide and cover manufacture, sale, and distribution for human use. There is no exemption carved out in the notifications for existing stock, export-only production, or specific states. What Has Changed: The Full List of Banned FDCs Each of the 16 notifications follows the same regulatory process but applies to a different drug combination. Here is the complete list with their notification numbers: S.O. Notification Fixed Dose Combination S.O. 3068(E) Acetyl Salicylic Acid + Ethoheptazine S.O. 3069(E) Aloe vera + Jojoba oil + Wheat germ oil + Tea tree oil S.O. 3070(E) Amoxicillin + Serratiopeptidase + Lactobacillus Sporogenes S.O. 3071(E) Dicyclomine + Paracetamol + Clidinium Bromide + Chlordiazepoxide S.O. 3072(E) Amoxicillin + Serratiopeptidase S.O. 3073(E) Aloe Extract + Allantoin + Alphatocopherol Acetate + D-Penthenol + Vitamin A S.O. 3074(E) Aloe Extract + Vitamin E + Dimethicone + Glycerine S.O. 3075(E) Aloe Vera + Jojoba Oil + Vitamin E S.O. 3076(E) Aloe vera + Orange oil S.O. 3077(E) Aloe vera + Vitamin E + Herbal S.O. 3078(E) Dicyclomine + Paracetamol + Clidinium Bromide S.O. 3079(E) Paracetamol + Lignocaine S.O. 3080(E) Gliclazide + Chromium Picolinate S.O. 3081(E) Amoxicillin + Cloxacillin + Lactic acid bacillus + Serratiopeptidase S.O. 3082(E) Cefadroxyl + Probenecid S.O. 3083(E) Cefuroxime + Serratiopeptidase Previous Position vs New Position Aspect Before June 2026 After June 2026 Legal status of these 16 FDCs Legally manufactured, marketed and sold, subject to existing drug licences Manufacture, sale, and distribution prohibited for human use Basis for review Combinations flagged as "irrational" by Expert Committee (2021) under evaluation Formal prohibition following Sub-Committee report (Dec 2024) and DTAB recommendation Manufacturer/stakeholder input Opportunity given through public notices during Sub-Committee review Review concluded; prohibition already notified Effective date N/A Immediate effect from date of notification (11th June 2026) Common Reasons Cited Across the Notifications While each combination has its own specific finding, a few recurring reasons appear across the 16 notifications: No sound clinical or pharmacodynamic justification for combining certain active ingredients (for example, antibiotic combinations with enzyme preparations like Serrati peptidase, where the committee found no solid clinical evidence supporting concurrent use). Lack of peer-reviewed scientific evidence supporting the rationality of the combination. Deviation from standard treatment guidelines, both national and international (as seen in the Gliclazide + Chromium Picolinate combination, where standard Type 2 Diabetes treatment guidelines do not recommend Chromium Picolinate). Undefined or uncharacterized products, particularly among several Aloe vera and herbal-based topical combinations, where the committee noted the product itself was not well defined. Absence of pharmacokinetic data to justify dose combinations, as seen in the Cefadroxyl + Probenecid notification. Risk exceeding benefit in the larger public interest, even where individual ingredients may be safe on their own. Implementation Timeline / Norms Effective Date All 16 notifications state that the prohibition applies "with immediate effect" from the date of the notification, i.e., 11th June 2026. No Stated Transition Period Unlike some regulatory changes that allow a grace period to liquidate existing stock or transition to alternate formulations, these notifications do not mention any sell-through or transition window. This makes immediate compliance review critical. Regulatory Process Timeline (For Context) Understanding how this ban evolved can help businesses anticipate future FDC reviews: 2021:  Expert Committee examines each FDC and finds them "irrational." Post-2021:  DTAB reviews the Expert Committee's findings and agrees in principle. DTAB Sub-Committee formed:  tasked with detailed examination of all irrational FDCs. Public notices issued:  Manufacturers and stakeholders allowed to submit precise data defending the combination. 28th December 2024:  Sub-Committee submits its final report recommending prohibition. DTAB agrees with the Sub-Committee's recommendation. 11th June 2026:  Central Government issues the final prohibition notifications under Section 26A. This roughly five-year process shows that FDC reviews in India move through multiple layers of expert scrutiny before a ban is finalised, which also means businesses holding FDC licences should track ongoing DTAB reviews proactively rather than waiting for a final notification. Why Was This Implemented? The government's stated objective across all 16 notifications is consistent: protecting public health by removing drug combinations that carry risk without adequate therapeutic justification, especially where safer alternatives already exist. Key objectives include: Patient safety:  removing combinations where the risk-benefit balance does not favour the patient. Scientific rigour in drug approval:  ensuring that combination drugs are backed by real clinical evidence, not just commercial convenience. Rational use of medicines:  aligning with India's broader effort (going back to earlier FDC bans in 2016 and subsequent years) to clean up the market of combinations that lack a sound pharmacological basis. Alignment with standard treatment guidelines:  as seen with the Gliclazide + Chromium Picolinate case, where the combination did not match national or international treatment protocols. Preventing irrational polypharmacy:  several banned combinations added ingredients (such as enzymes or vitamins) to established drugs without clear added benefit, increasing exposure to side effects unnecessarily. Impact on Businesses Manufacturers:  Manufacturers currently producing any of the 16 listed FDCs must immediately halt production. Continuing to manufacture a prohibited drug can expose the company to penal action under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, including seizure of stock and cancellation of related manufacturing licences. Importers:  If any of these combinations are imported into India in finished or bulk form, import of the prohibited combinations must stop. Import licences tied specifically to these formulations will need to be reviewed and, where applicable, surrendered or amended. Exporters:  The notices specifically limit manufacture, sale, and distribution for human consumption in that country. Firms that export such combinations need to carefully consider whether an export manufacturing operation is feasible, since the export business remains subject to India's regulations and manufacturing laws. Brand Owners and Marketing Companies:  Brand owners who outsource manufacturing (loan licensing/third-party manufacturing arrangements) are equally responsible for compliance. Marketing and promotional activity for these brands must stop immediately, including trade communication, MR (medical representative) detailing, and e-pharmacy listings. MSMEs and Startups:  Smaller pharmaceutical manufacturers, often reliant on a narrower product portfolio, may feel a sharper financial impact from a sudden ban. MSMEs should prioritise a rapid compliance review to avoid inventory write-offs that could lead to legal exposure. Large Enterprises:  Larger pharma companies with wide product portfolios should still treat this as serious regulatory non-compliance; even one SKU can trigger scrutiny of the entire manufacturing licence and facility. Traders, Distributors, and Retailers:  Anyone holding existing stock of these 16 combinations from stockists to retail pharmacies should stop further sale and consult with their supplier or a regulatory expert on the appropriate way to handle existing inventory. Service Providers (Formulation Developers, CROs, CDMOs):  Contract development and manufacturing organisations (CDMOs) and formulation R&D teams working on any of these combinations, or structurally similar combinations, should reassess ongoing projects in light of the reasoning given in these notifications, since similar combinations may face similar scrutiny in future DTAB reviews. How will Businesses achieve Compliance? The following is a compliance roadmap for businesses impacted by the notification: Step 1: Verification of Impact Verify whether you fall within the scope of the notification by cross-verifying your product range, active pharmaceutical ingredients used, and drug manufacturing licence (Form 25/28). Variations in the ratio or additional inclusion of ingredients may still place your business within the scope of this notification. Step 2: Immediate Suspension of Production, Sales and Distribution Since the ban is immediate, businesses cannot plan for a gradual closure. The manufacture, marketing material, and distribution must be stopped immediately. Step 3: Modification of your Manufacturing Licences Your manufacturing licence (form 25/28) might require modification, as the banned combination must be removed from the approved products under your licence. Step 4: Disposal of existing Stock It cannot be assumed that stock manufactured earlier is exempt from this ban. Seek advice from the State Drug Control Authority regarding proper disposal or recall procedure. Step 5: Communication to Distribution Network Send a communication about the ban to your distribution channel so the product is removed from sales channels. Step 6: Review of Research Pipeline If your research pipeline includes other combinations that have been banned, reconsider the scientific justification based on the DTAB findings before progressing further. Step 7: Documentation Document all compliance measures in case any scrutiny happens in the future. Common Compliance Mistakes to Avoid Assuming a "grace period" exists when the notification says "immediate effect." Continuing to sell existing inventory without checking with the licensing authority. Overlooking loan-licensing or third-party manufacturing arrangements when assessing exposure. Failing to update marketing and e-commerce/e-pharmacy listings promptly. Not documenting the compliance actions taken, which can matter significantly during inspections. If you're unsure whether your product formulation matches a banned combination exactly (for example, a similar but not identical ratio), don't self-assess. A regulatory consultant can help you interpret the notification in the context of your specific product dossier and avoid both over-compliance (unnecessarily halting a legal product) and under-compliance (continuing to market an illegal one). Benefits for Businesses That Get Compliance Right While a ban is disruptive, businesses that respond to it correctly and quickly stand to gain in several ways: Avoiding penalties and legal action under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act. Protecting manufacturing licences from suspension or cancellation risk tied to a single non-compliant product. Maintaining market and distributor trust, since a swift, professional response signals regulatory maturity. Freeing up R&D and manufacturing capacity to reformulate or pivot to compliant, evidence-backed alternatives. Reducing future regulatory risk by using this as an opportunity to review the rest of the product portfolio for similar irrational combinations. Smoother business continuity by acting early rather than waiting for a regulatory notice or inspection. Right Decision or Additional Burden? It's fair to look at this from both sides. From a public health standpoint, the ban is a reasonable and evidence-based decision. Each of the 16 combinations underwent a multi-year review, an Expert Committee assessment, a DTAB evaluation, a dedicated Sub-Committee review, and an opportunity for manufacturers to submit data before the final prohibition. That is a considerably more thorough process than an abrupt regulatory decision. As far as the business implications of the notification go, the lack of any phase-in period to ease the compliance process can pose practical problems: from excess stock to the need for immediate licence changes, all of which pose real obstacles. The balanced perspective: regarding the regulatory intent behind the notification itself, it is clearly a good move to eliminate drug combinations lacking scientific evidence. However, the time frame set by the regulators poses a challenge for those businesses that operated within legal boundaries until the announcement was made. Business Opportunities Created A regulatory disruption like this also opens doors: Reformulation opportunities- Companies can develop scientifically justified alternatives to replace the banned combinations, potentially capturing market share vacated by the ban. Consulting demand- Pharma companies across the country will need regulatory support to interpret and act on this notification, creating opportunities for compliance consultants and legal advisors. Portfolio review as a competitive edge- Companies that proactively audit their full portfolio against DTAB's ongoing "irrational FDC" review process can position themselves ahead of future bans. Trust-building with regulators- Businesses that respond transparently and promptly to this notification build long-term credibility with licensing authorities, which can smooth future approvals. Export and manufacturing realignment- Companies can use this as a trigger to review and modernise their broader manufacturing and product strategy. Why Choose Corpseed? Navigating a sudden regulatory prohibition like this is not something to handle informally. Corpseed works with pharmaceutical manufacturers, importers, and distributors across India on: End-to-end regulatory compliance support for drug licensing under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 Manufacturing licence review, amendment, and renewal assistance Documentation support for stock recall, licence surrender, or product discontinuation Guidance on reformulation and fresh product approval pathways. Liaison support with State Drug Control Authorities and the Central Drugs Standard Control Organisation (CDSCO). Application filing for new drug approvals and licence modifications. Pan-India support for businesses operating across multiple states with different licensing authorities. Dedicated regulatory experts who track ongoing DTAB reviews so you're not caught off guard by future FDC prohibitions A transparent, structured process with clear timelines, so you know exactly where your compliance stands at every stage. Whether you need to urgently amend a manufacturing licence, manage existing stock of a banned FDC, or explore compliant reformulation options, Corpseed's regulatory team can guide you through the process without unnecessary delays. Corpseed's Core Message Regulatory notifications like this one don't leave room for a "wait and watch" approach. The prohibition is already in effect, and the risk of continuing to manufacture, sell, or distribute any of these 16 combinations grows with every day of inaction. If your business is affected even partially, even though a third-party manufacturing arrangement is the smartest move, it is to get a clear, expert read on your exposure before it becomes a compliance issue. Delayed action on drug prohibitions can lead to stock seizures, licence suspension, and reputational damage that takes far longer to repair than the compliance process itself. Corpseed's regulatory consultants can help you assess your exposure, manage the transition, and get your documentation in order so you can focus on running your business. At the same time, the compliance side is handled by people who track these notifications for a living. Talk to a Corpseed regulatory expert today to review your product portfolio against this notification and stay ahead of future FDC reviews.