Hmm, I don't know that it's wrong to qualify "never" with a time frame.
Like Shakespeare: "Never since the middle summer's spring / Met we on hill, in dale, forest, or mead ..." (Midsummer Nights Dream) He's not saying they never met, just that they had never met "since middle summer's spring".
Since the Nazi massacres, a classic slogan has been "Never again". (Sorry if someone feels I'm trivializing the deaths of millions by using it for a grammar example.) Clearly it's not "never": the whole point is that it certainly did happen at least once. But "never AGAIN".
"The world is full of people who have never, since childhood, met an open doorway with an open mind." --E.B. White. Not absolutely never, but never SINCE CHILDHOOD.
In your example, the qualification is not even explicitly about time, but only indirectly. You can legitimately put all sorts of qualifiers on a "never". If I say, "I have never been late for a meeting at this company", that statement could be completely true, even if I have been late for meetings at other companies. But it puts an implicit time limit on it, namely, since I started working at this company.
Of course you can play word games with this -- the sort of word games that politicians, lawyers, and advertisers love to play. Like, "Senator Jones, is it true that you took a $10,000 bribe from Mr Smith?" "Absolutely not. Mr Smith never gave me $10,000." No, because it was actually his partner, Mr Brown, who gave the senator the money, or because the amount was really $15,000.
If you said, "I have never been late for a meeting for this project", I'd take that as a reasonable and honest statement. You may have been late for meetings for other projects, but not this one. "Never ... on this sprint" is arguably playing word games, but your statement could be quite true as said.