Yes.
Tactical/Aggressive response to 1. d4
King's Indian (1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3. Nf3 Bg7 4. e4)
Double-edged sword, but fun for black as your victories are usually crushing ones.
Nimzo-Indian (1.d4 d5 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4)
A good response to the QGD

As black, I NEVER play QGA (not saying it's bad, I just don't play it). Against d4, I play KID. Trying to learn the Nimzo-Indian.

I'm wondering if anyone can suggest some sort of tactical or agressive line to use against 1. d4 (no budapest gambit please).
The issues I have with the defenses I use, is that one of my bishops becomes stuck on his starting square, i can never seem to get coherent coordinated attacks going. In other words I'm always passive and can never manage to get any counterplay.
I was considering QGA; do you guys think this is sound for black?
if you have to ask if the QGA is sound for black? You arent even close to being ready to play tactical/agressive lines.

all depends on your level. Until 2200 you can totally crush your opponents with the KID, at higher levels you get strategically bad positions very often. Got quite some draws and some wins against IMs and FMs with it but usually not because of the opening. Very solid is simple d5 and going for the main lines. If u dont like that you can play the Slav or Semi Slav which offer some tactical possibilities and are well playable against all opponents. Benoni is also a tactical opening but not a good one in my honest opinion. But until very high levels also very strong.
I play the Semi-Slav, it's fun when an opponent goes down a razor-sharp Botvinnik line, but they often don't, you still get a Meran which is tactical and attacking. Last weekend an opponent tried to chicken out of the aggressive stuff against me and I simply got an almost winning position after 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Nf3 e6 5.Bg5 dxc4 6.e3 b5 7.Be2 Bb7 and I was a clean pawn up. 6.e4 is the Botvinnik which obviously you need to know well but it's about as tactical as you could ask for.

I play the Semi-Slav, it's fun when an opponent goes down a razor-sharp Botvinnik line, but they often don't, you still get a Meran which is tactical and attacking. Last weekend an opponent tried to chicken out of the aggressive stuff against me and I simply got an almost winning position after 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Nf3 e6 5.Bg5 dxc4 6.e3 b5 7.Be2 Bb7 and I was a clean pawn up. 6.e4 is the Botvinnik which obviously you need to know well but it's about as tactical as you could ask for.
What do you think of the anti-Meran line with 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Nf3 e6 5.e3 Bd6 6. b3
I like it because it's positional and white gets a little bit of an advantage with no risks. Admittedly it doesn't offer much, but no way I'm going to learn the Botvinnik. I took a look at Vigorito's book and I started crying.

5.e3 is fine. blacks 5... Bd6 is already not the best move and 6. b3 is a bad move. U should look at some basic theory in this line, took me 10 minutes to learn my whole repertoire against d5. Correct is 5. e3 Nbd7 6.Bd3 dxc4 followed by b5 and white can normally get some advantage but still highly unclear positions.

The QGA is:
A) Not tactical
B) Not aggressive
C) Extremely sound and Extremely dull
D) Great if you need a draw
If you are looking for something that is aggressive, tactical, and a practical try at a win, your best bet is the Grunfeld. However, it's highly theoretical, and unlike say, the Orthodox QGD, where common sense to get you thru without knowing the theory, the Grunfeld requires a lot more risky and unusual ideas, often times leaving pieces hanging, often willing to give up a pawn, etc.
For example: 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.e4 Nxc3 6.bxc3 Bg7 7.Bc4 c5 8.Ne2 Nc6 9.Be3 O-O 10.O-O Bg4 11.f3, Black has a couple of options here. 11...Na5 is a highly theoretical line where you must know what to do after 12.Bd3, but you also need to be willing to be down a pawn after 12.Bxf7+ (less popular now-a-days) and 13.fxg4. The other main option is 11...Bd7, which is similar to 10...Bd7 lines, but a move like 11...Be6 is just bad, despite that being where the Bishop goes after 11...Na5 12.Bd3. Subtle differences change the entire complexion of the position unlike in simpler opening such as the Orthodox QGD.

Are you looking for Aggressive???
Are you looking for Tactical???
Are you looking for Unsound???
Their you go!
http://www.chess.com/blog/X_PLAYER_J_X/understanding-the-clarendon-court-defence

The Tarrasch defense checks the boxes you're looking for OP, so long as you have the chutzpah to play with an isolated pawn.

There are lots of "tactical" responses to 1.d4.
In reality as you get better favorable tactics will start coming from favorable positions. You need tactics so you don't drop material and so you can win after building up positionally.
But anyways the Semi-Slav Triangle system is very tactical. 1 bad move and the evaluation can quickly change. As black you are trying to promote on the Queenside while white tries to push in the center and mount a piece attack on your king.
I'm wondering if anyone can suggest some sort of tactical or agressive line to use against 1. d4 (no budapest gambit please).
The issues I have with the defenses I use, is that one of my bishops becomes stuck on his starting square, i can never seem to get coherent coordinated attacks going. In other words I'm always passive and can never manage to get any counterplay.
I was considering QGA; do you guys think this is sound for black?