I submitted a paper to a reputed journal on behalf of my organization (research publications are not very common here). The double blind reviews were received 8 months later when I had moved on to an entirely different project. Both the reviewers indicated accepting the paper but required huge modifications along with generation of more results. The re-submission date was 10 days after I received the reviews, though the modifications would have easily taken at least two months.
Since, I didn't have access to the resources (server, bandwidth etc.) and none of my co-authors were interested in reworking along with a dismal response from the management for request to reallocate the resources, I tried to do it in my spare time but the paper was automatically withdrawn since 10 days had passed. After a few days, the senior management suddenly enquired the status of the paper and forced me to resubmit to the same journal as is. Obviously, the paper got rejected within 2 months. Editor didn't gave any comments except that the reviewers are suggesting to reject the paper.
I have the following confusions: (Didn't think they make separate questions)
Should I ask the reviewer what were the reasons for rejection (which I doubt is re-submission without modification if it went to the same reviewer)
Should I explain him that I was not journal shopping and the situation was such that I had to resubmit the paper? (Since I am pretty young and do not want the future papers to be rejected in conferences where same editor comes up).
I have now incorporated the suggested changes and wish to resubmit. Should I now resubmit it to the same journal or to a different journal?