Recall that the Fourier transform on the Schwartz space $\mathcal{S}(\mathbb{R}^d, \mathbb{C})$ is defined by $$\hat{f}(\xi) = \int\limits_{\mathbb{R}^d} f(x) e^{-2\pi i \langle x \mid \xi \rangle} dx$$ where $dx$ denotes integration wrt. the Lebesgue measure. Now one can show, that the Fourier transform is an isometric automorphism on the Schwartz space $\mathcal{S}(\mathbb{R}^d, \mathbb{C})$ (with inverse $\check{f}(\xi) = \hat{f}(-\xi)$) and since the Schwartz space $\mathcal{S}(\mathbb{R}^d, \mathbb{C})$ is dense in $L^2(\mathbb{R}^d, \mathbb{C})$ we may extend the Fourier transform (by utilization of Cauchy sequences and completeness of $L^2$) to an isometric automorphism $$\mathfrak{F} \colon L^2(\mathbb{R}^d, \mathbb{C}) \to L^2(\mathbb{R}^d, \mathbb{C})$$ In particular one can verify, that if $f \in L^1(\mathbb{R}^d, \mathbb{C}) \cap L^2(\mathbb{R}^d, \mathbb{C})$, then $$\mathfrak{F}(f)(\xi) = \int\limits_{\mathbb{R}^d} f(x) e^{-2\pi i \langle x \mid \xi \rangle} dx$$
In the case where $d = 1$ we set $L^p(\mathbb{R}, \mathbb{C}) = L^p$ for $p \geq 1$ and we now consider a specific example: Look at the characteristic function $f = \chi_{[-1,1]}$ of the interval $[-1,1]$. Then clearly $f \in L^1 \cap L^2$, so by what we have referred to earlier we know that $$\mathfrak{F}{f}(\xi) = \int\limits_{\mathbb{R}} f(x) e^{-2\pi i \xi x} dx = \frac{\sin(2\pi \xi)}{\pi \xi}$$ Many resources now claim, that it is justified to take the inverse Fourier transform of $\mathfrak{F}f$ in the sense that $$f(\xi) = \int\limits_{\mathbb{R}} \frac{\sin(2\pi x)}{\pi x} e^{2 \pi i x \xi} dx$$ and upon setting $\xi = 0$ we obtain $$\pi = \int\limits_{\mathbb{R}} \frac{\sin(y)}{y} dy$$
However it is very well known, that $\mathfrak{F}f \notin L^1$ and that the Lebesgue integral over $\mathbb{R}$ of $\frac{\sin(y)}{y}$ doesn't exist.
I guess as this result only makes sense for a Fourier transform wrt. the improper Riemann integral I would be curious for references, or even better for a write-up proof on here, as to why this is justified. I would also like to know if there is some connection between the (extended) inverse Fourier transform restricted to $\mathfrak{F}(L^1 \cap L^2)$ and the improper Riemann integral, i.e. is it always true, that $$\forall f \in \mathfrak{F}(L^1 \cap L^2) \colon \mathfrak{F}^{-1}(f)(\xi) = \int\limits_{-\infty}^\infty f(x) e^{2\pi i \xi x} dx$$ where the RHS is now to be understood as an improper Riemann integral.