Global policy discourse emphasizes placing front-of-pack nutrition labels (FOPLs) on packaged foods, but debates continue to rage on the appropriate format. There are two key types of label formats, summary and informative. In developing countries, with mixed to low levels of education, it is advised that FOPLs need to be easily identifiable, understandable, and can influence purchase decisions. In this context, we tested the suitability of five FOPL formats in India through a randomized experimental design survey. Respondents were allocated to different groups representing the FOPLs and controls. A 15-treatment and 1 control cell between-subjects design was used for the study. Surveys were conducted on the field through face-to-face interactions with a total of 20,564 participants from all over India across regions, genders, age groups, and education levels. The results, which were validated using sub-sample tests, suggest that summary formats of Health Star Ratings and Warning Labels ranked higher on ease of identification and understanding and were also able to influence purchase intentions as compared to informative labels such as Multiple Traffic Lights, monochrome Guideline Daily Amounts, and Nutriscore. Our analysis reveals that summary FOPLs are more useful in influencing healthier food choices as compared to informative FOPL formats. The study's insights can help regulators design a policy that empowers consumers and nudges food brands toward healthier product reformulations.