210.7 would be violated in that instance because of the absence of a lighting outlet (light kit). The prospective h.o. in the op's post must either decide to keep the kits or go with the switched rec(s) for a lamp to be legal in bedrooms and deal w/ the drywall. Augie47's reference and don_rescucapt19's interpretation are correct.
Since the lighting outlet is the place where current leaves the building wiring to go to utilization equipment, you could argue that in the absence of an actual light the outlet (whether a receptacle or a blanked off box) is only potential and not real.
But if you rewrite the definition to be "a place where current can be taken..." instead of "a place where current is taken..." both of those fall into place.
Now the definition of Lighting Outlet is actually even more specific:
:An outlet intended for the direct connection of a lampholder or luminaire." Look at that word
intended. To me that implies that at the time of the inspection the lampholder or luminaire does not actually have to be there. But is it still an outlet in that case?
And is a cord and plug a direct or an indirect connection to the lampholder? You could argue on this basis that a switched outlet for a floor lamp does not qualify because of the cord. Or you could argue that the cord is part of the lampholder in that case, but the use of an extension cord would make the floor or table lamp non conforming with "Lighting Outlet".
My but this is fun!