Beats me. I haven’t surveyed cases generally, tennis specific or CAS appeals. Plus they’re all very fact specific anyway,
I guess you could have a system where a positive test triggers an investigation but no action is taken against a player unless and until the ITIA investigation concludes and either the player and ITIA come to an agreement or a third party arbiter resolves any dispute. This can take months. If there is an appeal to CAS even longer.
But they went with an auto provisional suspension for a positive test. They don’t care if someone held a gun to your head and made you ingest the substance. You are auto banned. Harsh. However, the player may appeal to an independent third party to have the provisional ban lifted while a full investigation takes place.
But what you’re proposing is IMO fundamentally unfair to players. The ITIA which is acting as both detective and prosecutor can not be given the additional power of a judge to be final say on how strong its preliminary case is, that an independent tribunal will subsequently agree with it if after its full investigation a player challenges its conclusions, or to determine unilaterally what punishment it thinks appropriate. How does the player get their time suspended back (and undo any damage to their reputation and/or finances) if the Independent Tribunal (or CAS) reaches a different more player friendly result ?
If you’re competing during a period a suspension was lifted (i.e., you’re not suspended) and you’re not otherwise being charged with a new ADRV during that period then it counts. Fair and square.
What is against common sense or unfair, specifically.
There are time periods involved but action is probably more a function of when weekends fall

than the ITIA manipulating notices with an eye on the tennis calendar. Prosecutors of all stripes always have discretion.