Let's look at the 2013 Competition Handbook, which is the latest as far as I know. And, I also know, that looking at the rules and pointing out the rules and quoting the rules is a good way to really antagonize a peeved modeler.
Shadows should be present when two surfaces meet (e.g. belts over tunics) and on undersurfaces (e.g. between legs and under arms).
Headgear shadows should show on the figure's face.
Equipment such as swords should have a shadow shown on the figure.
So, it seems clear to me that the issue of shadows is addressed in the Handbook. I hold that the Handbook is saying that light should act like light acts on any surface ... say, the surfaces of a figure under a consistent light source (sort of). And that shadows and highlights must be painted. BTW, the Handbook does not say: "The Judge should hold the figure under the venue's lights to create highlights and shadows from the actual light that is present in order to present the figure in the best light possible." It also doesn't say: "Shadows and highlights cast by venue lighting should have the same credit given as shadows and highlights painted on the figure." So, when I judge a figure that sits under overhead venue lighting which provides definite shadows over the figure, I use my flashlight to hit the areas where shadows from the venue lighting are evident. If the shadow from the venue's lighting disappears and I can see that the paint job has no shadow whatsoever, I advocate that that figure is non-competitive.
As to the OP, no shadows or highlights on a figure's armor removes it from further consideration.