BIS implementation guide published for extended reality (XR) products in India

Extended-reality (XR) products — virtual and augmented reality headsets — sit at the intersection of several existing categories: IT equipment, radio device, battery-carrying portable product and display.

This intersection is what complicates the scope question. Publishing an application guide serves exactly to remove this uncertainty: it clarifies which standard the product is to be assessed against and which registration route to follow.

Under India's Compulsory Registration Scheme (CRS), tests are carried out at laboratories in India recognised by BIS, and registration is granted on a product-and-factory basis. For XR products this can mean separate test series for multiple standards.

For products with a radio interface, spectrum-side approvals also come into play; these are a process separate from BIS registration and need to be run in parallel. Planning the two sequentially unnecessarily lengthens the timetable.

Determine in writing, based on the guide text, which categories the product falls under. Recording the justification in borderline cases prevents repeating the same discussion in later applications.

Set up the model list and product family definition broadly from the start. Adding a model later means a new process each time.

Plan the laboratory queue backward from the application date. In newly scoped categories, application volume increases as the application date approaches.

India's mandatory registration regime expands its scope by product category, and the expansion has continued for years. When a category is brought into scope, a transition period is typically defined; at its end, importing and selling unregistered products stops.

For a new category, the hardest question is usually not the technical requirement but the SCOPE BOUNDARY: which category does a product fall under? Is a head-mounted display device a display product, an IT product, or its own category? Application guides are published precisely to answer this question.

Recording the decision in writing with its justification in borderline cases is the document that proves most useful in a later audit; scope decisions relying on verbal confirmation cannot be defended afterward.

The decisive constraint in this regime is that testing must be carried out WITHIN THE COUNTRY: the sample is sent to India and tested at a recognised laboratory against the national standard. Foreign reports are not accepted as a rule.

Sending the sample is a work item in itself: the customs process, sample count and laboratory queue make up most of the overall timetable. Sending the sample incomplete or with incorrect configuration causes the queue slot to be lost.

The application is made through a party established in the country; a foreign manufacturer needs to appoint an authorised representative, and registration proceeds through that party.

National standards are based on international standards but are not identical to them. Deviations arise from climate conditions, grid characteristics and national preferences; they can bring additional tests or different conditions.

Having a report already obtained against an international standard therefore eases the work but does not complete it: whether deviations are covered is compared clause by clause.

For products with imaging and audio, safety and electromagnetic-compatibility requirements additionally run separately; a single registration does not cover all requirements.