This collection lists these angels three times over, under elemental, planetary and sephirotic headings, and the reason is that Western ceremonial magic inherited three separate attribution systems and never reconciled them. The clearest evidence of the failure to reconcile is visible in the material set out here.
In the planetary system, inherited from the grimoire tradition and codified by Agrippa, Michael governs the Sun and Raphael governs Mercury.
In the sephirotic system, as the Golden Dawn taught it and as Crowley's tables record it, Tiphareth takes Raphael and Hod takes Michael.
Those two statements are in direct conflict, because Tiphareth is the sphere of the Sun and Hod is the sphere of Mercury. The same two angels are assigned to the same two heavenly bodies in opposite arrangements, depending on which of the two systems is being consulted. Both assignments are recorded here, in the planetary and sephirotic groupings respectively, and a reader moving between them will find Michael solar in one place and Mercurial in the other.
This is not a defect in the recording. It is a real and known inconsistency in the sources, and it has been noticed by practitioners for well over a century without being resolved, because there is no authority that could resolve it. The planetary attributions descend from late antique and medieval angelology through the Latin magical literature. The sephirotic attributions descend from Jewish Kabbalistic sources by a different route. The Golden Dawn adopted both and tabulated them side by side.
The elemental grouping is more stable, because it is younger and has a single source: Raphael in the east with Air, Michael in the south with Fire, Gabriel in the west with Water, Uriel in the north with Earth. That is the arrangement of the order's banishing ritual and it is essentially uniform in modern practice, which is what a nineteenth-century construction with one point of origin produces.
The practical consequence is that an attribution in this subject is not a fact about an angel. It is a fact about a system, and the system has to be named for the attribution to mean anything. Sources that give a single planetary correspondence without saying which tradition it comes from are concealing a disagreement rather than reporting a consensus.